The impending environmental disaster

Tefal said:
So stop eating fish?

Why are you justifying destroying the planets ecosystem and natural wildlife? For your pleasure?

Also we really aren't making dangerous compounds unless we start living a hell of a lot longer.

You're gonna die before microplastics cause you an issue.

Buy seriously just think you're sat there saying a concentrated source of buried hydrocarbons (even toxic ones) is worthless and not valuable.
Click to expand...
You're just trolling now.

We don't even recycle 10% of the plastic we generate today, let alone digging in landfill for plastic that's way more difficult to access than collecting it from the roadside. What is the incentive for anyone to extract plastic from landfill? Or even to attempt it? Are you talking hundreds of years from now when oil has run out?

I can't believe you really are advocating just kicking the can down the road, and letting it be someone else's problem.
 
Out of interest, how aware are people around the institutional drivers for this environmental change and timings of these?

For example the impact, timing and prevalence of ESG around organisational investment and financing?
 
Last edited:
Scrutinize said:
Out of interest, how aware are people around the institutional drivers for this environmental change and timings of these?

For example the impact, timing and prevalence of ESG around organisational investment and financing?
Click to expand...

Not much but happy to learn more. I'm not naive though, I know there's big money to be made in 'green' initiatives. You could call it a bandwagon, and due to the position of the wealthy they ultimately have first dibs, big risk is a potentially big return. Change is also probably linked to the majority of their livelihoods, so they need to adapt. I think that's just common sense.

Personally, I've moved my pension into a fossil fuel-free plan, so it's fair to say that regular folk are also having a say as to what they want their money funding. The same goes across the board, from banking to deciding what products to buy at the supermarket. There's a shift and suppliers are reacting, albeit a bit slowly or incorrectly.
 
Last edited:
Nothing will ever change, we are to selfish as a species and will happily walk into an ecological timebomb as long as we are okay today.

No way are we going to avoid climate change and wiping out the majority of ecosystems.
 
Angilion said:
Someone has. It's purely imaginary, though. We're nowhere near being able to build one and maybe never will be. Even if we stripmined the entire solar system and destroyed everything in it, I think we'd still be short of materials.

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



No. We should not be gambling the entire future of human civilisation on something that isn't anywhere near being viable now and might not be viable ever let alone anywhere near soon enough. We need solutions that work now. We can't afford to gamble everything on solutions that might possibly perhaps maybe work after implausibly large amounts of resources have been poured into them for decades or centuries.

Also, obviously, if we converted a non-trivial amount of the energy reaching Earth from the sun into electricity we'd also be significantly changing the entire global environment and climate and weather systems. In ways that we couldn't accurately predict. But it's a moot point because we couldn't possibly come anywhere close to being able to manufacture and maintain that amount of solar power equipment anyway. Nor would we need to - a far smaller amount would be enough if it was spread out over the world and connected by HVDC lines and all the countries of the world shared electricity freely. Which is impossible for different reasons.

I think basing everything on any single electricity generation method is a flawed approach. But especially so for one that doesn't and can't work that way.
Click to expand...

I somewhat disagree. Its the most viable and reliable constant energy source that we have and one that we only need to harness a tiny insignificant amount from.

I mean, maybe my post was a little hyperbolic in terms of chucking every egg we have into that basket, but i do think that this should be at the forefront of research.
 
Bassmansam said:
This
Click to expand...

I'm not surprised that this is your opinion, and the opinion of I'm sure thousands, if not millions of others. I'm an optimist, I don't think it's too late, but everyone will need to make some pretty radical changes, globally, ASAP, to mitigate a potential disaster. And a lot of people aren't comfortable with that. To me it boils down to care, what do you care more about, yourself or your environment? For me, it's the environment, because my kids are going to have to grow up in the world we're creating. I'm trying to do my bit by eating less meat, buying locally produced fruit and veg, trying to buy as little plastic as possible, I'm even paying for carbon offsetting by means of planting trees. We've had an EV for 4 years on renewable tariffs too. I hope it all adds up, even a tiny amount, and even if it doesn't, I'm comfortable that I've tried.
 
bloodiedathame said:
I'm not surprised that this is your opinion, and the opinion of I'm sure thousands, if not millions of others. I'm an optimist, I don't think it's too late, but everyone will need to make some pretty radical changes, globally, ASAP, to mitigate a potential disaster. And a lot of people aren't comfortable with that. To me it boils down to care, what do you care more about, yourself or your environment? For me, it's the environment, because my kids are going to have to grow up in the world we're creating. I'm trying to do my bit by eating less meat, buying locally produced fruit and veg, trying to buy as little plastic as possible, I'm even paying for carbon offsetting by means of planting trees. We've had an EV for 4 years on renewable tariffs too. I hope it all adds up, even a tiny amount, and even if it doesn't, I'm comfortable that I've tried.
Click to expand...


I try to do my best, recycling everything I can, cut down on waste not buying junk, donations to wildlife etc charities but I just can't see it making a difference, but i want to look my kid in the eye and say I tried.

Then again having a kid is not the best thing for the world either...
 
alchal said:
I try to do my best, recycling everything I can, cut down on waste not buying junk, donations to wildlife etc charities but I just can't see it making a difference, but i want to look my kid in the eye and say I tried.

Then again having a kid is not the best thing for the world either...
Click to expand...

Well just don't stop, because there are plenty of people who do appreciate the effort. :)

Depends on the kid you raise... they could be the key to unlocking fusion, the brains behind cleaning up microplastics, the inventor of home-printed meat.
 
bloodiedathame said:
I'm not surprised that this is your opinion, and the opinion of I'm sure thousands, if not millions of others. I'm an optimist, I don't think it's too late, but everyone will need to make some pretty radical changes, globally, ASAP, to mitigate a potential disaster. And a lot of people aren't comfortable with that. To me it boils down to care, what do you care more about, yourself or your environment? For me, it's the environment, because my kids are going to have to grow up in the world we're creating. I'm trying to do my bit by eating less meat, buying locally produced fruit and veg, trying to buy as little plastic as possible, I'm even paying for carbon offsetting by means of planting trees. We've had an EV for 4 years on renewable tariffs too. I hope it all adds up, even a tiny amount, and even if it doesn't, I'm comfortable that I've tried.
Click to expand...

well i am 32 and me and my gf don’t want kids. We don’t drive either and we try do 2/3 days a week not eating meat. I just think we are in the minority as most people i know around my age seem to be having a kid now and or drive a car. I think my efforts are a drop in the ocean.
 
Bassmansam said:
well i am 32 and me and my gf don’t want kids. We don’t drive either and we try do 2/3 days a week not eating meat. I just think we are in the minority as most people i know around my age seem to be having a kid now and or drive a car. I think my efforts are a drop in the ocean.
Click to expand...

They are a drop in the ocean, but it doesn't matter, you're leading by example. I think you'd be surprised at the number of people globally who are cutting back. And with more research and better alternatives, more and more people will realise it's doable and makes a difference. One tiny step at a time.
 
Jono8 said:
I somewhat disagree. Its the most viable and reliable constant energy source that we have and one that we only need to harness a tiny insignificant amount from.

I mean, maybe my post was a little hyperbolic in terms of chucking every egg we have into that basket, but i do think that this should be at the forefront of research.
Click to expand...

I somewhat agree with that position (as opposed to gambling the whole of human civilisation on technology that doesn't exist yet and might never exist), but I think I'd place a lower priority on it than you would. Grid scale energy storage would be a very useful thing, but it doesn't exist and no known current technology, not even experimental lab scale technology, is even anywhere close to potentially being up to the job. I think a higher priority should be placed on stuff that works and works now. We need stuff that works and works now. Even if theoretically possible optimistic future technology and global co-operation does come to exist, we need a viable solution in the intervening decades.

Also, solar is definitely not "the most viable and reliable constant energy source that we have". It's not reliable. It's not constant. It's not viable with existing technology. Not as a sole source of electricity generation. Also, crucially, it's not controllable. It's theoretically viable with either massive over-capacity and massive storage or massive over-capacity and a single global electricity grid. But neither of those scenarios exist or are likely to exist within at least several decades. With current technology, solar isn't even truly sustainable. The source is (on a human timescale - it'll be OK for about another billion years) but the equipment isn't because it has a limited working life and isn't perfectly recyclable. Scaling is also limited, since the equipment requires finite resources to make. The same goes for wind power, which is even less reliable.

I think we'd be better off with a variety of generating methods, crucially including ones that we can control and those as the core of generation. Right now, that would mean nuclear fission. It's the only safe enough and clean enough controllable generation method that's sustainable for long enough. In parallel, research into methods that would be better in the longer term, probably resulting in an increase over time in the amount of wind and solar. Maybe also some tidal coming into the mix. Maybe nuclear fusion replacing fission as the backbone. Maybe high altitude wind coming in at some point in the future. Maybe space-based solar coming in at some point in the future. Maybe a full on Dyson swarm at some point. Maybe something that's wholly imaginary so far, like harnessing matter-antimatter annihilation as an energy source or manipulating black holes as an energy source. Maybe something radically different, something that's not even imagined yet. There are possibilities. But in the meantime we need stuff that works now.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom