Jump to content
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
Strawberry Orange Banana Lime Leaf Slate Sky Blueberry Grape Watermelon Chocolate Marble
blackrose

Climate change

Featured Posts

The Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change reckon we have to reduce carbon emissions and global temperature rises to below 1.5 degrees C by 2030 otherwise we will have reached a tipping point from which there is no return. It's only 12 years away. If we're still alive we'll see chaos reign, but it's your kids generation that are going to bear the brunt.

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-45775309

 

I reckon we've got no chance. We've known about this for decades and done very little. Unfortunately apart from places like North Korea, global economic models are based on an ever increasing rate of production and consumption which combined with the global population increase is wreaking environmental havoc. We've never managed to come up with an economic alternative or decouple our "growth economies" from a corresponding growth in environmental impacts. We haven't even tried really. We've had warning upon warning but just ignored them. Eventually the shit is going to hit the fan.

 

I remember this. He was prophetic.

 

 

Edited by blackrose

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I am 60 and I suspect will live to be old my kids are done for to say the least! i am green 3kw of solar converting the boat to electric drive etc etc but I am one amongst thousands so wont make a difference at all. The rich and powerful who own all fossil fuel sources will be dead like me before the real pain begins so they dont care either, good luck you young uns because you are going to need it

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

No one is discussing what happens when the ice melt from the North Pole disrupts the North Atlantic conveyor (look it up) and we are plunged into another 500year ice age. The duck is going to get cold. Climate change yes. Global warming mmmmmmmm? 

If it really is global warming then we are all doomed as China and the USofA will never give up their coal. No point in even trying.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The Gaia Principle holds that The Earth might well respond and heal itself in ways we are not expecting, IIRC.

 

It's typically arrogant of the human race to a) believe we are responsible, and b ) that we have the ability to fix it. 

 

 

 

 

 

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

No one is discussing what happens when the ice melt from the North Pole disrupts the North Atlantic conveyor (look it up) and we are plunged into another 500year ice age. The duck is going to get cold. Climate change yes. Global warming mmmmmmmm? 

If it really is global warming then we are all doomed as China and the USofA will never give up their coal. No point in even trying.

Bob we have all the coal we need under our feet! thats what got us into this mess in the first place😥

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, Mike the Boilerman said:

The Gaia Principle holds that The Earth might well respond and heal itself in ways we are not expecting, IIRC.

 

It's typically arrogant of the human race to a) believe we are responsible, and b ) that we have the ability to fix it. 

 

 

 

 

 

Under the Gaia principle the earth may indeed respond and take care of itself, it doesn't actually mean that humans will remain part of the equation. Dinosaurs, who are considered to be 'failures' because they were wiped out lasted a mere 30 million or so years, we've been here for about 200,000 years and already the future isn't that bright, the earth will continue with or without us. I would however suggest that throwing up into the atmosphere all of the fossil fuels that have been laid down over the past 300 million years or so just might have a bearing on the situation.

 

Was it 'arrogant' of the human race to discover that CFC's were causing a hole in the ozone layer and then display equal arrogance in fixing it?

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Dr Bob said:

No one is discussing what happens when the ice melt from the North Pole disrupts the North Atlantic conveyor (look it up) and we are plunged into another 500year ice age. The duck is going to get cold. Climate change yes. Global warming mmmmmmmm? 

If it really is global warming then we are all doomed as China and the USofA will never give up their coal. No point in even trying.

It's not actually the ice melt from the North Pole that is the problem since it is likely that within the next very few years there wont be any ice at the North pole in summer, the concerning bit is the 3.2 kilometers of ice that is currently sitting on Greenland. If that melts it will disrupt the NAC and you also need to consider that London is further north than St Johns in Newfoundland so climate change could very well mean rather cold winters.

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Whether humans are the cause of climate change or not, it can't be disputed that the world's resources are under critical pressure. Food, water, habitable land. This has already led to many conflicts and will increasingly do so, there's no doubt about this.

 

There's really no need to argue over climate change. Whether it's caused by human behaviour or not, the current capitalist model of consumption of luxury goods by richer nations, supported by the development of poorer nations, propped up by the need for an ever growing population is unsustainable and will lead to catastrophe.

 

The current approach is to completely disregard the issues of resources and population. Instead, it was decided that global warming is a fact and the solution is to mitigate the problem, give the world a little more time, by focussing on emissions. It's not a coincidence that this approach enables new companies to be set up with nice air conditioned offices, will create jobs etc. The solution then, to a problem caused by capitalism and consumption, is to have yet more capitalism but give it an 'environmental' slant.

 

What this is, in terms of the longer term future of the world, might be likened to a young boy trying to piss into a gale force wind.  

  • Greenie 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

People.  It's called global warming for a reason - it's global.  Yes there will be areas of the globe that get colder (like possibly the UK if the NAC is disrupted) but on the whole the globe is warming.  True there has always been variability but from the climate trends we have so far determined or infered there has NEVER been such a rapid increase.  Having worked as a meteorologist for 20 years I have no doubt that global warming is man made as there is no other credible alternative hypothesis to account for these changes.

 

Yes - unfortunately it's my kids generation and the next that are going to have to pick up the pieces (if that is even going to be possible).

 

Australia is one of the worst contributors to this problem as it pushes to sell its huge reserves of fossil fuels.  Of course from a business perspective that's what they should do.  If you have old stock that you know is going to be redundant in the near(ish) future you'd want to cash in on it and shift as much as possible as quickly as possible.  Morally and ethically  though, I would suggest this model or phyilosophy will be ultimately fatal for most lifeforms on this planet.

 

Now some might think, ok 1.5 degrees warmer, very nice.  Less frost better summers etc etc but a rise of that magnitude has a huge knock on effect.  Many parts of the eco-system will not survive those increases - for example lets say one of the bees favourate plants dies off, that would follow with a rapid decreas in the bee population, then no crops - oops starving and dying people all over the place.  

 

Yes - as was mentioned earlier it is hugely arrogant to assume we can fix it but maybe that arrogance is our only realistic hope! 

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, peterboat said:

I am 60 and I suspect will live to be old my kids are done for to say the least! i am green 3kw of solar converting the boat to electric drive etc etc but I am one amongst thousands so wont make a difference at all. The rich and powerful who own all fossil fuel sources will be dead like me before the real pain begins so they dont care either, good luck you young uns because you are going to need it

 

Well I can't help thinking that if you have kids you don't just double or triple your carbon footprint, you magnify it exponentially, so in that context it doesn't really matter how many solar panels you use. Unfortunately having kids isn't green because overpopulation isn't sustainable.

 

 

I've mentioned overpopulation on this forum before, both here in the VP and also on topics such as why our waterways are overcrowded and full of people living on boats. We don't like hearing the truth or talking about it, because as Attenborough says, it's a taboo subject.

Edited by blackrose
  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 hours ago, nb Innisfree said:

Climate is always changing so climate change is real, whether any change is down to human beings is still debatable. 

 

Not really. You can carry on debating about this until the cows come home. You can debate that the Earth is flat if you want to, but at some point the 3% of climate scientists who still deny that anthropogenic factors are involved in current climate change and the the deniers who follow them will have to start listening to the views of the 97% of climate scientists who say that climate change is caused by human activity.

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

 

Edited by blackrose
  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, blackrose said:

 

Well I can't help thinking that if you have kids you don't just double or triple your carbon footprint, you magnify it exponentially, so in that context it doesn't really matter how many solar panels you use. Unfortunately having kids isn't green because overpopulation isn't sustainable.

 

 

I've mentioned overpopulation on this forum before, both here in the VP and also on topics such as why our waterways are overcrowded and full of people living on boats. We don't like hearing the truth or talking about it, because as Attenborough says, it's a taboo subject.

Indeed. So perhaps developed western nations, possessing the best scientists and often claiming to have the best minds, should set an example to less developed nations. A fair start might be to swap 'child tax credits' for a system where you pay more tax, the more children you have. Similarly, rather than create new benefits to assist with childcare; the full charge should be payable by parents; plus a new tax; that recognises the damage having children has on the environment. These new taxes could be progressive i.e fairly modest for a first child but increasingly punitive for those who choose to have more.

 

To those who start yelling China, human rights etc.: we live in a society, in a world that we all, hopefully, agree should be preserved. There seems little point in people having large families if there isn't a decent world for their children to live in. I'd also suggest that the rights of society as a collective, to continue to exist, far outweigh the 'rights' of an individual to act selfishly on their instincts. If they choose to ignore the greater importance of society there's no force, but they should pay. The fact that they must pay will be of great leverage, it will rarely happen.

 

Sounds fair to me, and workable. All we need now is someone with the balls to talk about it. 

  • Greenie 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

It doesn't help that buildings, especially publicly owned buildings are lit up 24/7, anything vaguely pretty is floodlit (churches etc) and we are asked to unplug our phone charger. All the time power is pissed against the wall like this it undermines the credibility of official advice to save energy. Shortly whole streets will be hung with strings of lights for two months to demonstrate that frivolous, wasteful use of energy is the norm.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, blackrose said:

 

Not really. You can carry on debating about this until the cows come home. You can debate that the Earth is flat if you want to, but at some point the 3% of climate scientists who still deny that anthropogenic factors are involved in current climate change and the the deniers who follow them will have to start listening to the views of the 97% of climate scientists who say that climate change is caused by human activity.

 

https://climate.nasa.gov/scientific-consensus/

 

Might is not necessarily right. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
29 minutes ago, Sir Nibble said:

It doesn't help that buildings, especially publicly owned buildings are lit up 24/7, anything vaguely pretty is floodlit (churches etc) and we are asked to unplug our phone charger. All the time power is pissed against the wall like this it undermines the credibility of official advice to save energy. Shortly whole streets will be hung with strings of lights for two months to demonstrate that frivolous, wasteful use of energy is the norm.

Absolutely.

 

And why were the building regs. not updated years ago to maximise insulation, minimise draughts and have a specified amount of solar power? Silly me to think that may be a good idea, the house builders and commercial developers would not stand for it, it would cost them money. So a new house would cost more but how much as a percentage of the total cost, I doubt it would be more than a few percent these days.

  • Greenie 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, blackrose said:

You can debate that the Earth is flat if you want to, but at some point the........

 

Nah, we discussed that in a thread a few months back and IIRC we decided it was.

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
36 minutes ago, Dr Bob said:

Nah, we discussed that in a thread a few months back and IIRC we decided it was.

 

No-one ever posted up a photo of the fence though, so I’m still not convinced.  

 

 

  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Call me old fashioned, but I don't think that climate issues are going to be fixed on here - even inside the tiny environment of our boats, we can't manage to come to a consensus on whether eco fans help! ;)

 

  • Greenie 1
  • Haha 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

When we heard about 'the greenhouse effect' back in the late 1960's and 70's the only people who believed it tended to be hairy, dope smoking lefty liberals who were mocked for going on about it. Now the only people who don't believe that climate change is real and caused by humans tend to be prats like Trump and other fools. At least that is progress of some sort and the vast majority of the scientists and people who have the levers of power should be fully aware of what is happening, What to actually do about it is easy. Stop burning stuff, shut all factories. ground all aircraft, destroy all cars, live on turnips in caves. cull half the worlds population (not me though) Ok, that ain't going to happen but that is the direction that our species needs to be heading. There may be trouble ahead........

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, Tigerr said:

Climate change debate is a bit similar to 'creationism', in the face of evolution. Lots of people are genuinely, sincerely ignorant, but they still 'feel' things very strongly and regard their feelings as fact. In a world in which the options pop someone as thick as mince, but think themselves really clever,  carry as much weight as those of someone who has spent their life studying the complex nature of things, and conducting peer reviewed experiment to establish what is real - we end up with this nonsense. 

There really isn't a debate in any meaningful sense - there is overwhelming, conclusive evidence-based observation and conclusion. On the other 'side' the few fossil-industry funded sock puppets feed into the ignorant desire to continue with a way of life that is so obviously not just unsustainable but massively destructive to future generations. Because, driving a big car feels great. 

Like those big Tesla electric cars that charge from the national grid?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 minute ago, mrsmelly said:

Like those big Tesla electric cars that charge from the national grid?

Thats the one Tim, but increasingly powered by wind and solar!! Every day we see more turbines going into use and on a smaller scale more solar panels on boats😎

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.