Jump to content

COP26


Japan Jambo

Recommended Posts

12 hours ago, SwindonJambo said:

That would be a good shout but unfortunately we won't have the balls to do it for political reasons. It's a surefire way to fall out with other countries, many of which are allies. The US, Canada and Australia have a particularly heavy carbon footprint so how do we justify  punishing them along with China and India who are having their industrial revolution now, 200 odd years after the developed World had theirs. 

 

Unfortunately I think we're totally rogered.  No one ever dates talk about World population growth, a contributor in itself.

 

3 hours ago, highlandjambo3 said:

I mentioned this earlier….to many people, not enough space.  The size of the population is growing, the size of the planet is not.  It was mentioned about nature making a balance, COVID, flu, floods, natural catastrophes etc…..bollocks, there is no way that is even closer to curbing population growth.

 

Absolutely.

We could insulate every house in the UK, we could agree to every one of XR's demands, indeed the whole world could stop using fossil fuels tomorrow and go completely green, and all it would do imo is buy us a bit of time, because if the World's population keeps growing at the rate it is, then sooner, rather than later, there simply won't be enough resources on the planet to sustain the World's population.  Once that happens, then there will be a fight for survival, which will make both world wars look like a punch-up at the local disco on a saturday night.

 

In my lifetime the population of the World has more than doubled, from 3.1bn (1960) to currently around 7.8bn, my youngest grandchild is 10 yrs old, it is scary to think what the World's population could be in 50 years time when he's 60, it could easily be anything between 10bn to 15bn.

So in the space of 100 years the Worlds population could easily have trebled maybe even quadrupled.

 

What is the solution, there isn't any that I can see, as it's every person's right to have children and unless there was mandatory Worldwide population controls, which there simply wouldn't be, then as a species we're goosed, the planet will survive, the planet will probably thrive without us on it, but I do really think it is just a matter of time before there are too many humans chasing fewer and fewer resources, especially in a warming climate which is going to put ever more pressure on those dwindling resources.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 594
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

  • manaliveits105

    68

  • Japan Jambo

    41

  • JudyJudyJudy

    32

  • Seymour M Hersh

    27

34 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

 

Absolutely.

We could insulate every house in the UK, we could agree to every one of XR's demands, indeed the whole world could stop using fossil fuels tomorrow and go completely green, and all it would do imo is buy us a bit of time, because if the World's population keeps growing at the rate it is, then sooner, rather than later, there simply won't be enough resources on the planet to sustain the World's population.  Once that happens, then there will be a fight for survival, which will make both world wars look like a punch-up at the local disco on a saturday night.

 

In my lifetime the population of the World has more than doubled, from 3.1bn (1960) to currently around 7.8bn, my youngest grandchild is 10 yrs old, it is scary to think what the World's population could be in 50 years time when he's 60, it could easily be anything between 10bn to 15bn.

So in the space of 100 years the Worlds population could easily have trebled maybe even quadrupled.

 

What is the solution, there isn't any that I can see, as it's every person's right to have children and unless there was mandatory Worldwide population controls, which there simply wouldn't be, then as a species we're goosed, the planet will survive, the planet will probably thrive without us on it, but I do really think it is just a matter of time before there are too many humans chasing fewer and fewer resources, especially in a warming climate which is going to put ever more pressure on those dwindling resources.

 

 

 

David Attenborough was saying much the same from around 2013 - the fundamental source of all the planets problems - is population growth -  and one way to alleviate this is empowerment of women, freeing them from the reproductive cycle, seen in many cultures & religions .

Christopher Hitchens also argued the same.

 

Didn't see much of COP 26 - so not sure if these key issues were raised - amongt talk of renewables & plastic.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

49 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

 

Absolutely.

We could insulate every house in the UK, we could agree to every one of XR's demands, indeed the whole world could stop using fossil fuels tomorrow and go completely green, and all it would do imo is buy us a bit of time, because if the World's population keeps growing at the rate it is, then sooner, rather than later, there simply won't be enough resources on the planet to sustain the World's population.  Once that happens, then there will be a fight for survival, which will make both world wars look like a punch-up at the local disco on a saturday night.

 

In my lifetime the population of the World has more than doubled, from 3.1bn (1960) to currently around 7.8bn, my youngest grandchild is 10 yrs old, it is scary to think what the World's population could be in 50 years time when he's 60, it could easily be anything between 10bn to 15bn.

So in the space of 100 years the Worlds population could easily have trebled maybe even quadrupled.

 

What is the solution, there isn't any that I can see, as it's every person's right to have children and unless there was mandatory Worldwide population controls, which there simply wouldn't be, then as a species we're goosed, the planet will survive, the planet will probably thrive without us on it, but I do really think it is just a matter of time before there are too many humans chasing fewer and fewer resources, especially in a warming climate which is going to put ever more pressure on those dwindling resources.

 

 

Think you are underestimating.

When I started high school in 75, population was just under 4 billion.

As you say, approaching 8 billion, so doubled in 50 years. 

Very feasible to double in the 50 years, so 16 billion.

So so much to be done, it just a ****ing mess. Watched The Story of Plastic last night. Mind numbing trying to work out a solution to this mess.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, jonesy said:

The one thing I don't get in among that is, given how far birth rates have fallen in Europe and the Far  East, how has the world population boomed so much? Is it just sheer weight of numbers in Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of Asia?

A left field theory is that it’s not so much grown but become more countable as people have moved from rural areas to all the mega cities in Asia and elsewhere. Still growing but easier to keep track of new with censuses being more reliable due to urban dwelling. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Tazio said:

China is the worlds factory now. 

 

Correct! 

Also, bought a pair of speakers from Superfi, (Tannoy) there was a wee union jack placed by the terminals on the back, this was only highlighting they were designed in UK and not manufacturered here.😠

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, felix said:

 

David Attenborough was saying much the same from around 2013 - the fundamental source of all the planets problems - is population growth -  and one way to alleviate this is empowerment of women, freeing them from the reproductive cycle, seen in many cultures & religions .

Christopher Hitchens also argued the same.

 

Didn't see much of COP 26 - so not sure if these key issues were raised - amongt talk of renewables & plastic.

 

Seen a two part documentary he did about this, and he painted a very bleak picture for the human race if the issue wasn't tackled.

 

Didn't see a lot of COP26 either, but I don't think it would have been mentioned, it's the elephant in the room.

Almost everyone knows population growth is a major problem but nobody wants to discuss it, seem to recall China being absolutely slaughtered in the media when they brought in their one child policy, and that was the 70's, what would it be like now with social media etc. Little wonder nobody wants to go down that road.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

45 minutes ago, jonesy said:

The one thing I don't get in among that is, given how far birth rates have fallen in Europe and the Far  East, how has the world population boomed so much? Is it just sheer weight of numbers in Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of Asia?

 

Pretty sure there is a correlation between GDP/healthcare and birth rates. The richer countries get the more the birth rates tend to drop.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
57 minutes ago, Tommy Brown said:

Think you are underestimating.

When I started high school in 75, population was just under 4 billion.

As you say, approaching 8 billion, so doubled in 50 years. 

Very feasible to double in the 50 years, so 16 billion.

So so much to be done, it just a ****ing mess. Watched The Story of Plastic last night. Mind numbing trying to work out a solution to this mess.

 

That's quite staggering stats.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

40 minutes ago, jonesy said:

The one thing I don't get in among that is, given how far birth rates have fallen in Europe and the Far  East, how has the world population boomed so much? Is it just sheer weight of numbers in Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of Asia?

 

It's Africa and Asia where the sharp rise over the next 30 yrs will come from. Estimated by 2050, the world's population will rise by 2 billion - to about 9 billion total  . There was only 2 billion people in the world in 1930 - so that would make a projected 7 billion increase over 120 yrs !

Half of the 2 billion rise is expected in Africa . 

That's a lot of bodies to feed & house - in a continent where only 10% of people, have access to electricity.

 

 

22 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Seen a two part documentary he did about this, and he painted a very bleak picture for the human race if the issue wasn't tackled.

 

Didn't see a lot of COP26 either, but I don't think it would have been mentioned, it's the elephant in the room.

Almost everyone knows population growth is a major problem but nobody wants to discuss it, seem to recall China being absolutely slaughtered in the media when they brought in their one child policy, and that was the 70's, what would it be like now with social media etc. Little wonder nobody wants to go down that road.

 

 

 

Seems to be the bigger picture J-J - and one which seems to be pushed to one side. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

highlandjambo3
36 minutes ago, jonesy said:

The one thing I don't get in among that is, given how far birth rates have fallen in Europe and the Far  East, how has the world population boomed so much? Is it just sheer weight of numbers in Sub-Saharan Africa and other parts of Asia?

Near the end of my army career I spent 12 months in Sierra Leone (West Africa), organising digging wells for villages, building schools and other social buildings and, training their Army.  

 

Sierra Leone was a British colony until 1964 when they gained independence.  After slavery was abolished by Britain, the Royal Navy went on to capture Spanish & Portuguese ships who were still transporting slaves.  These slaves were then released in Sierra Leone, the slaves called the town where they were released Freetown (now the capital) as it was their town of freedom.  We grew a massive amount of rubber tree plantations in that country.  The diamond mining industry was rife and probably still is, headed up by South African diamond miners.  The Chinese bought up all the fishing rights and many other things that helped cripple this country which is about the size of Wales.

 

Whilst the people were generally on the whole a decent and level headed lot, their view on family and population differed vastly from ours.  Their armed forces held us up in very high regard and, quite often there was a degree of interest in our families and home lifestyles.  Most, if not all conversations about my family were met with surprise that I only had two children, it was often commented that someone like me should have had about 8-10.  
 

Whilst having no social service or pension system in place in Sierra Leone each family pretty much stands on their own two feet, the elderly struggle to survive unless their children support them so, their simplistic view (which is understandable), the more children I have the more chance that one of them might be a doctor or nurse and support the rest of the family.  This idea is ingrained on their population no matter how risky it seems………..there’s the African population scenario that most of the under developed countries run by.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, highlandjambo3 said:

Whilst having no social service or pension system in place in Sierra Leone each family pretty much stands on their own two feet, the elderly struggle to survive unless their children support them so, their simplistic view (which is understandable), the more children I have the more chance that one of them might be a doctor or nurse and support the rest of the family.  This idea is ingrained on their population no matter how risky it seems………..there’s the African population scenario that most of the under developed countries run by.

 

Pretty similar to Victorian Britain and before, have lots of kids in the hope one or two survived into adulthood and hopefully get themselves out of the poverty and look after their parents (if they lived long enough).

Edited by Jambo-Jimbo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Japan Jambo said:

 

Pretty sure there is a correlation between GDP/healthcare and birth rates. The richer countries get the more the birth rates tend to drop.

 

I think there is as well, the population of richer countries are either stagnant or falling.

 

Here's the conundrum faced by some developing countries, Gabon in central Africa being one of them.

They have huge natural resources of oil, rainforests etc, but also have one of the poorest populations, so what do they do, do they exploit all of those resources and perhaps help to feed and educate their population but trash the environment or do they do what they have been doing for a while and that is use the oil wealth to balance the books and thereby have managed to protect their rainforest, however if they stopped oil production as the climate activists want, then they wouldn't be able to protect the rainforest, which would then probably have to cut down to sell the wood and use the land to cultivate crops. 

That's why countries like Gabon want the richer nations to pay them more for them to be able to continue to protect the rainforests, which many of the richers nations are not so keen to do so.  Gabon isn't the only country which faces a problem like this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

joondalupjambo

The change in the agreement text from coal phase out to coal phase down leaves it nicely poised for these feckers to give the Cumbria coal project the go ahead.  Would not put it past them.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, joondalupjambo said:

The change in the agreement text from coal phase out to coal phase down leaves it nicely poised for these feckers to give the Cumbria coal project the go ahead.  Would not put it past them.

 

Yes, however all we hear is that's it's a coal mine in Cumbria, but what isn't usually mentioned is that it's coking coal, which is used exclusively to make steel, meaning if we didn't get it from Cumbria then we'd have to import it from somewhere else as we do now from the USA, Russia & Australia, which means it'll have a larger carbon footprint due to the transportation of the coal.

 

When the coking coal is burnt it'll produce pretty much the same amount of CO2 whether it's from the USA, Russia, Australia or Cumbria, what is different will be the size of the carbon footprint getting the coal from the mine to the furnance. 

Surely that footprint will be less if the coal is being transported 100 miles from Cumbria to the furnace rather the thousands of miles being transported from America, Russia or even Australia.

 

Personally I'd rather there wasn't any need to open this mine, however in saying that if you are going to have to burn the coal to make steel in the first place, would it not be better for the environment to have the coal travelling 100 miles from Cumbria rather than 10,000 miles from Australia.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

joondalupjambo
58 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yes, however all we hear is that's it's a coal mine in Cumbria, but what isn't usually mentioned is that it's coking coal, which is used exclusively to make steel, meaning if we didn't get it from Cumbria then we'd have to import it from somewhere else as we do now from the USA, Russia & Australia, which means it'll have a larger carbon footprint due to the transportation of the coal.

 

When the coking coal is burnt it'll produce pretty much the same amount of CO2 whether it's from the USA, Russia, Australia or Cumbria, what is different will be the size of the carbon footprint getting the coal from the mine to the furnance. 

Surely that footprint will be less if the coal is being transported 100 miles from Cumbria to the furnace rather the thousands of miles being transported from America, Russia or even Australia.

 

Personally I'd rather there wasn't any need to open this mine, however in saying that if you are going to have to burn the coal to make steel in the first place, would it not be better for the environment to have the coal travelling 100 miles from Cumbria rather than 10,000 miles from Australia.

Do not disagree but this is going to be symbolic and although the detail is correct the point is all that people will hear is that the UK opened a new coal mine.  That against the back drop of trying to tell others what to do about coal would be a political disaster.

 

Providing coking coal via other sources maybe a better political option and they can then talk about carbon off setting and other greening to distract.  It is of course a difficult situation and one which will cause some folk some sleepless nights over the coming up weeks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, joondalupjambo said:

Do not disagree but this is going to be symbolic and although the detail is correct the point is all that people will hear is that the UK opened a new coal mine.  That against the back drop of trying to tell others what to do about coal would be a political disaster.

 

Providing coking coal via other sources maybe a better political option and they can then talk about carbon off setting and other greening to distract.  It is of course a difficult situation and one which will cause some folk some sleepless nights over the coming up weeks.

 

Exactly, that's the only thing people will see and hear, a new coal mine Nooooooooooooooo.

Even if by opening this mine meant that the steel industry's carbon footprint was reduced, that's not what people would see.

 

What does annoy me, is that we hear people moan and groan about a potential new coal mine in Cumbria, but are silent on new mines being opened up in Devon & Cornwall to mine for Lithium and other rare metals to be used in electric car batteries, these mines also have a large carbon footprint and damage the environment, but where are the activists against them.......

Link to comment
Share on other sites

joondalupjambo
1 hour ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Exactly, that's the only thing people will see and hear, a new coal mine Nooooooooooooooo.

Even if by opening this mine meant that the steel industry's carbon footprint was reduced, that's not what people would see.

 

What does annoy me, is that we hear people moan and groan about a potential new coal mine in Cumbria, but are silent on new mines being opened up in Devon & Cornwall to mine for Lithium and other rare metals to be used in electric car batteries, these mines also have a large carbon footprint and damage the environment, but where are the activists against them.......

Issue is there are probably not enough activists, voters elect Government's who do not represent modern agendas, in general the public are apathetic, money and capitalism is still king, people can only care so much, geo politics cripples societies, the rich have the power to get richer and on and on and on it goes.  We all kind of get it but we are all pretty helpless in reality as to what to do.

 

Ok that was a bit of a rant but I reckon in general people do care and do understand but we live in a world that is fast going up it's own bum  I am afraid. 

Edited by joondalupjambo
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I P Knightley
On 14/11/2021 at 10:03, manaliveits105 said:

Great news historic agreement signed - Glascow has saved the wurld !

 

activists have lost again  ram yer blah blah blah 

 

great job by Boris and the team in leading the way .

“I don’t think António would want people to think that we’ve cracked it here at COP in Edinburgh, of course not.”

 

That's your 'Boris', right there. An absolute cucking funt of a man.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Real Maroonblood
25 minutes ago, I P Knightley said:

“I don’t think António would want people to think that we’ve cracked it here at COP in Edinburgh, of course not.”

 

That's your 'Boris', right there. An absolute cucking funt of a man.

😄

Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, Japan Jambo said:

 

Indeed, not the only hypocrite amongst that lot, IB ain't much better, as two of them that have been on the TV live in un-insulated houses themselves, but they want everybody else to fork out and either insulate their homes or drive about in electric cars whilst they still drive about in diesel cars/vans and live in un-insulated houses.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, joondalupjambo said:

Issue is there are probably not enough activists, voters elect Government's who do not represent modern agendas, in general the public are apathetic, money and capitalism is still king, people can only care so much, geo politics cripples societies, the rich have the power to get richer and on and on and on it goes.  We all kind of get it but we are all pretty helpless in reality as to what to do.

 

Ok that was a bit of a rant but I reckon in general people do care and do understand but we live in a world that is fast going up it's own bum  I am afraid. 

 

Yes, a sky news poll just the other day showed that 76% of Britions agree that humans are responsible for climate change, but...........when asked would they be willing to pay more in taxes, only 40% said that they would, 78% were opposed to increased gas & electricity prices and 60% were opposed to an increase in petrol/diesel.

https://news.sky.com/story/only-two-in-five-support-raising-taxes-to-reduce-britains-carbon-emissions-but-most-in-favour-of-hiking-cost-of-air-travel-sky-news-poll-12466118

 

Basically in a nut shell it's...............get someone else to pay for it all..........and there you have it.

 

P.S. Alarmingly the poll also showed that 11% believed climate change was nothing to do with humans and even more disturbing was that 2% didn't think the climate was changing at all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

55 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yes, a sky news poll just the other day showed that 76% of Britions agree that humans are responsible for climate change, but...........when asked would they be willing to pay more in taxes, only 40% said that they would, 78% were opposed to increased gas & electricity prices and 60% were opposed to an increase in petrol/diesel.

https://news.sky.com/story/only-two-in-five-support-raising-taxes-to-reduce-britains-carbon-emissions-but-most-in-favour-of-hiking-cost-of-air-travel-sky-news-poll-12466118

 

Basically in a nut shell it's...............get someone else to pay for it all..........and there you have it.

 

P.S. Alarmingly the poll also showed that 11% believed climate change was nothing to do with humans and even more disturbing was that 2% didn't think the climate was changing at all.

 

I was told similar polls in the US put the average cost of what folks were prepared to pay to fix the problem at around $100 a year. No doubt that this is where the rubber meets the road...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

54 minutes ago, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Yes, a sky news poll just the other day showed that 76% of Britions agree that humans are responsible for climate change, but...........when asked would they be willing to pay more in taxes, only 40% said that they would, 78% were opposed to increased gas & electricity prices and 60% were opposed to an increase in petrol/diesel.

https://news.sky.com/story/only-two-in-five-support-raising-taxes-to-reduce-britains-carbon-emissions-but-most-in-favour-of-hiking-cost-of-air-travel-sky-news-poll-12466118

 

Basically in a nut shell it's...............get someone else to pay for it all..........and there you have it.

 

P.S. Alarmingly the poll also showed that 11% believed climate change was nothing to do with humans and even more disturbing was that 2% didn't think the climate was changing at all.

Aye.... depressing isn't it.     Corbyn's brother is 1 of the climate change deniers.  Holocaust denier too.     

 

I think carbon taxes need to be applied to all sorts of things, not just petrol.    Basically everything containing oil-derived plastic or requiring blast furnace processing.  Yes, it'll make things more expensive, but there needs to be a game-changing measure to dampen down demand for all sorts of unnecessary sh1t.   You can still buy it, but you'll have to pay a carbon tax.     Folk are deluded if they think its all up to  governments to introduce a greener lifestyle for its citizens.  If you really care about the state of the climate and environment, you CAN do your own wee bit.  Do you really need to replace your car every 2 years ? Buy a new phone every year just because Samsung tell you to ?   

 

Just my opinion, but the West is responsible for giving the climate a double whammy. Firstly for 200 years of uncontrolled industry ... and then  delegating a lot of that manufacture in the 70's/80's to the Far East where wages and health & safety standards were much lower than here. Even adding in the  cost of shipping the stuff back here still  made the stuff cheaper to produce.

 

The posts above about population explosion being a major factor in the pollution of the atmosphere are spot-on too.   

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, Lone Striker said:

Aye.... depressing isn't it.     Corbyn's brother is 1 of the climate change deniers.  Holocaust denier too.     

 

I think carbon taxes need to be applied to all sorts of things, not just petrol.    Basically everything containing oil-derived plastic or requiring blast furnace processing.  Yes, it'll make things more expensive, but there needs to be a game-changing measure to dampen down demand for all sorts of unnecessary sh1t.   You can still buy it, but you'll have to pay a carbon tax.     Folk are deluded if they think its all up to  governments to introduce a greener lifestyle for its citizens.  If you really care about the state of the climate and environment, you CAN do your own wee bit.  Do you really need to replace your car every 2 years ? Buy a new phone every year just because Samsung tell you to ?   

 

Just my opinion, but the West is responsible for giving the climate a double whammy. Firstly for 200 years of uncontrolled industry ... and then  delegating a lot of that manufacture in the 70's/80's to the Far East where wages and health & safety standards were much lower than here. Even adding in the  cost of shipping the stuff back here still  made the stuff cheaper to produce.

 

The posts above about population explosion being a major factor in the pollution of the atmosphere are spot-on too.   

 

 

He's many things, but don't think he's a Holocaust denier.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Malinga the Swinga
15 hours ago, Lone Striker said:

Aye.... depressing isn't it.     Corbyn's brother is 1 of the climate change deniers.  Holocaust denier too.     

 

I think carbon taxes need to be applied to all sorts of things, not just petrol.    Basically everything containing oil-derived plastic or requiring blast furnace processing.  Yes, it'll make things more expensive, but there needs to be a game-changing measure to dampen down demand for all sorts of unnecessary sh1t.   You can still buy it, but you'll have to pay a carbon tax.     Folk are deluded if they think its all up to  governments to introduce a greener lifestyle for its citizens.  If you really care about the state of the climate and environment, you CAN do your own wee bit.  Do you really need to replace your car every 2 years ? Buy a new phone every year just because Samsung tell you to ?   

 

Just my opinion, but the West is responsible for giving the climate a double whammy. Firstly for 200 years of uncontrolled industry ... and then  delegating a lot of that manufacture in the 70's/80's to the Far East where wages and health & safety standards were much lower than here. Even adding in the  cost of shipping the stuff back here still  made the stuff cheaper to produce.

 

The posts above about population explosion being a major factor in the pollution of the atmosphere are spot-on too.   

 

 

Yeah, it's the West's fault. Introducing the Industrial Revolution and not caring about environment. Let's rip down any statues of these guys and sue their relatives for damages. Just because they had no idea what they were doing would be negative hundreds of years in future is no excuse. All this trying to improve lives of the working man and help country develop is just nonsense.

I mean, we don't want to blame Russia or China, or SA or Brazil or India who are building mines massively bigger than anything we ever did, even when they know the damage they are doing. 

Other than making yourself feel superior, doing your wee bit won't make one iota of a difference if the Chinese carry on as they are.

Greta and her chums, and all the other professional moaners, most living comfortable lives paid for by tax payers or companies seeking to enter power markets, should take themselves off to China and start their protests on Chinese streets.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, Malinga the Swinga said:

Yeah, it's the West's fault. Introducing the Industrial Revolution and not caring about environment. Let's rip down any statues of these guys and sue their relatives for damages. Just because they had no idea what they were doing would be negative hundreds of years in future is no excuse. All this trying to improve lives of the working man and help country develop is just nonsense.

I mean, we don't want to blame Russia or China, or SA or Brazil or India who are building mines massively bigger than anything we ever did, even when they know the damage they are doing. 

Other than making yourself feel superior, doing your wee bit won't make one iota of a difference if the Chinese carry on as they are.

Greta and her chums, and all the other professional moaners, most living comfortable lives paid for by tax payers or companies seeking to enter power markets, should take themselves off to China and start their protests on Chinese streets.

 

I get your point of view, but we either do something or we do nothing.   It very easy to do nothing and just use China, India etc as the justification for carrying on as normal.   Their standpoint is that they're at the stage we were at 100 years ago, so they should be allowed to develop just like we did.    

 

The "something" I was meaning was to reduce (or stop completely ) our consumption of stuff with a high polluting label - regardless of where its made.   Hopefully  one of the actions governments take after all the COP stooshie is to introduce mandatory labelling of most stuff to indicate the scale of pollution their manufacture & transport is responsible for - just like the energy efficiency scale on fridges and washing machines.   Then you still have  choice in what you buy, but you'll  have to pay more for the "nasty" stuff.   

 

Each to their own though. A lot depends on how sensitive you are to what your children & grandchildren will think of the  example you set.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

highlandjambo3

We’re not going to save our way of life at all.  Yes the planet will survive in spite of us as it has done.  We’ve been talking about climate change for a long time, we’ve now been talking REALLY loudly about climate change and loads of agreements have been made about ambitious targets and Glasgow has saved the planet…….nah, I’m not buying it.
 

I filled by diesel car up yesterday, next week I’ll do the same and, when the price of diesel goes up I’ll still fill my car up, my car is fairly new and the biggest most expensive car I have ever bought.  My gas bill came through the door today, quite expensive as I need to keep all my house warm all the time, another gas bill will arrive next month.  There was a time I didn’t own a house or car.  I used to own a 3 bedroom house, I now own a 4 bedroom house.  I have my holidays booked next year in Spain, I have 2 other short breaks booked as well.  I feel I have worked hard all my life and deserve to splash out now I’m in my later years, I go to the best restaurants, I buy the best foods from the supermarkets.

 

Is there anyone on jkb, or anyone you know who is actually downsizing anything in their lives…..I’d wager there are very few people actually doing any of this.  Im not talking about recycling my plastic bottles or the likes, I’m talking about living in a small 1 bedroom house with solar panels and a wind turbine, driving a fiat 500…..No, I’m absolutely not and there is where the problem lays.  Not many of us are willing to have REAL change in our lives.

 

The rich will not give up what they have.  The news yesterday had a famous couple from London who were robbed whilst they were on holiday (can’t remember their names), their 58 bedroom mansion in London was robbed…..58 fekin rooms WTF is that about. 
 

Next year/decade we will see more floods, bigger fires, more natural disasters, we will see the extinction of various species  on land and in the ocean, we will watch on the news houses dropping into the ocean due to costal erosion and, we will continue to consume.

 

Serious question - are you or anyone you know using less than they were 5 years ago?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

manaliveits105

6000 items of IKEA furniture from COP26 being stored in tents in Glasgow until they can decide who to donate them to - might take months 

 

New furniture in a tent in Glascow - that’s no gonna work !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 hours ago, highlandjambo3 said:

We’re not going to save our way of life at all.  Yes the planet will survive in spite of us as it has done.  We’ve been talking about climate change for a long time, we’ve now been talking REALLY loudly about climate change and loads of agreements have been made about ambitious targets and Glasgow has saved the planet…….nah, I’m not buying it.
 

I filled by diesel car up yesterday, next week I’ll do the same and, when the price of diesel goes up I’ll still fill my car up, my car is fairly new and the biggest most expensive car I have ever bought.  My gas bill came through the door today, quite expensive as I need to keep all my house warm all the time, another gas bill will arrive next month.  There was a time I didn’t own a house or car.  I used to own a 3 bedroom house, I now own a 4 bedroom house.  I have my holidays booked next year in Spain, I have 2 other short breaks booked as well.  I feel I have worked hard all my life and deserve to splash out now I’m in my later years, I go to the best restaurants, I buy the best foods from the supermarkets.

 

Is there anyone on jkb, or anyone you know who is actually downsizing anything in their lives…..I’d wager there are very few people actually doing any of this.  Im not talking about recycling my plastic bottles or the likes, I’m talking about living in a small 1 bedroom house with solar panels and a wind turbine, driving a fiat 500…..No, I’m absolutely not and there is where the problem lays.  Not many of us are willing to have REAL change in our lives.

 

The rich will not give up what they have.  The news yesterday had a famous couple from London who were robbed whilst they were on holiday (can’t remember their names), their 58 bedroom mansion in London was robbed…..58 fekin rooms WTF is that about. 
 

Next year/decade we will see more floods, bigger fires, more natural disasters, we will see the extinction of various species  on land and in the ocean, we will watch on the news houses dropping into the ocean due to costal erosion and, we will continue to consume.

 

Serious question - are you or anyone you know using less than they were 5 years ago?

 

yup I am, family and I moved into a flat in the centre of town and ditched a car. Smaller space means I buy less crap that I don't need and I use public transport/taxis instead of driving (wife still has a car).

 

Aside from that though I very much take your point, my motives were in truth more about the commute though excess consumption was actually a secondary factor too (honest guv).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

highlandjambo3
12 minutes ago, Japan Jambo said:

 

yup I am, family and I moved into a flat in the centre of town and ditched a car. Smaller space means I buy less crap that I don't need and I use public transport/taxis instead of driving (wife still has a car).

 

Aside from that though I very much take your point, my motives were in truth more about the commute though excess consumption was actually a secondary factor too (honest guv).

👏👏👏👏good on you…honestly, but most people will not be down sizing….we can’t help it, we want more, bigger, better, faster etc…….actually with hindsight, we can keep going the way we are and blame the system/ government for failing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 minutes ago, highlandjambo3 said:

👏👏👏👏good on you…honestly, but most people will not be down sizing….we can’t help it, we want more, bigger, better, faster etc…….actually with hindsight, we can keep going the way we are and blame the system/ government for failing.

Yip, my neighbours are going abroad 3 times a year still. If they can do it, so can I.

:peepwall:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, highlandjambo3 said:

👏👏👏👏good on you…honestly, but most people will not be down sizing….we can’t help it, we want more, bigger, better, faster etc…….actually with hindsight, we can keep going the way we are and blame the system/ government for failing.

 

It's human nature and we are becoming more and more entitled. The demands on what the government must pay for with a total disconnect of how it's paid for is a huge threat to liberal democracy - it's so much easier to say yes that to say no - just look at the stooshie over the temporary £20 uplift (please, I'm not looking to debate the merits of it, just merely stating that a populist move was very difficult to subsequently remove).

 

A bit wonky but there is an interesting idea around GDP and it's continued growth as a measure of success being a contributing factor and that perhaps we should pivot to a happiness index instead;

 

https://www.wartsila.com/insights/article/going-beyond-gdp-the-happiness-index

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just days after India gets the COP26 deal watered down on coal, schools have had to close in New Delhi and the Indian courts are considering a lockdown, the first in the countries history due to dangerous levels of pollution, even coal fired power stations have had to close due to the smog.

https://news.sky.com/story/india-authorities-considering-new-delhi-lockdown-to-cut-dangerous-air-pollution-levels-12470667

 

All seems like a bit of karma about this.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

manaliveits105

Nippoleon doing a U turn on CAMBO it seems moving away from a transition to look after the 100000 jobs in the sector in favour of a bit of virtue signalling - she must have forgot her recent support for it with her selective memory .

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, highlandjambo3 said:

👏👏👏👏good on you…honestly, but most people will not be down sizing….we can’t help it, we want more, bigger, better, faster etc…….actually with hindsight, we can keep going the way we are and blame the system/ government for failing.

 

Don't have to downsize to be more environmentally responsible, we move into a 3 bed house next week after selling a 1 bed flat in the city yet will be consuming less. The house is less than 20 years old with good glazing and insulation so will cost less to keep warm than the 1 bed tenement flat with single glazed sash and case windows and there are solar panels on the roof.

 

Having the extra space will allow me to work from home more often reducing the use of my car, even when I do drive into the office I'll be using less fuel as it's all motorway and i'll not be sat in traffic getting through Edinburgh. Additionally having a house with driveway will open up the opportunity to move to an EV that I wouldn't have had for a good few years living in a flat in the city.

 

And finally having our own garden will allow us to at least produce some of our own fruit and veg, might not be a lot but it's still a reduction.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

28 minutes ago, manaliveits105 said:

Nippoleon doing a U turn on CAMBO it seems moving away from a transition to look after the 100000 jobs in the sector in favour of a bit of virtue signalling - she must have forgot her recent support for it with her selective memory .

 

 

and this is a surprise ? 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 2 months later...

What a fekin let down.

All the posturing and absolute bullshit .

What was it @Taffin posted.

322,000 jumbo jets worth of pollution caused by the response to covid.

My work took me to a rural part of the country today.

Trossachs the Ochils and the Fintry hills all viewable.

Bags of dumped rubbish at the side of a burn.

To the south Grangemouth and some other petrol chemical plant to the west.

Meanwhile the total embarrassing leader in London lies cheats while the Edinburgh leader chokes our SECONDARY school kids with masks that you see dumped everywhere.

 

What a selfish selfish bunch we really are.

Protect the old sook the up the wealth with absolutely no feks given about what we leave behind.

 

Total farce

Edited by Ked
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A Boy Named Crow
On 16/11/2021 at 00:41, Jambo-Jimbo said:

 

Exactly, that's the only thing people will see and hear, a new coal mine Nooooooooooooooo.

Even if by opening this mine meant that the steel industry's carbon footprint was reduced, that's not what people would see.

 

What does annoy me, is that we hear people moan and groan about a potential new coal mine in Cumbria, but are silent on new mines being opened up in Devon & Cornwall to mine for Lithium and other rare metals to be used in electric car batteries, these mines also have a large carbon footprint and damage the environment, but where are the activists against them.......

The solution to both these problems is hydrogen.  It can be used to fuel steel production, and you can use hydrogen fuel cells instead of batteries. There's even a study going on just now into making hydrogen from sunlight and water...no need for big expensive electrolysers!

 

It'll never catch on though...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.




×
×
  • Create New...