Climate Change

[Mike]

Tony Blaire said that he does not really think we need to reduce our effect on the Climate Change. I am sure that he is losing the plot. Apparently if we stopped all emissions in the UK, China would make up for it within two years. I think this attitude stinks.

It reaks of, they are not doing anything about it, why should we? I would argue that the morality of the situation should come into play and would give us an ideal launch and head start on the economy of the future. Full recycling - or garbage harvesting. I am sure we could put a lot of the rubbish in landfill back into use if we refined the process.

This seems like a very short way of thinking and will ensure we do not innovate as a country any time soon.

[Fez]

proper reductions in popultion lie with industry which doesn't feel inclined to do anything unless the government tells it to, and they wont of course because they don't like upsetting the suits which bankroll their parties to begin with. the world is going to hell in a bucket and no amount of recycling your waste paper is going to make any difference. face it; we are in striking distance of destroying the planet completely and it will take many generations to turn it around.

[Mike]

It will take many more generations if we don't start somewhere! :D

[seaflower]

this topic makes me sad

[johnriley1uk]

I was thinking about Global Warming today, and as regards the energy we use to heat our homes it struck me that as the earth warms up, we won't burn as much fuel because we won't need to heat as much. I wonder if in similar ways the overall picture will tend to balance out anyway, regardless of what we do.

In any event the earth is a dynamic system which is always in perfect balance. It may not be the balance we want, but that's another issue.

Meanwhile, reasonable efforts to recycle are good, but on the other hand fining households who accidentally put the wrong thing in the wrong bin is not good.

Hopefull it will all settle down and the excessive zeal and silliness will become tempered by good sense. It could happen...

[Mike]

The only problem is that we will have a warmer planet which is suited to our temperature for a short while, then the problem will continue to escalate and then we will have a planet too hot for us and we will require massive cooling loads in buildings. . . . . thus the problem gets worse.

Apparently he is taking a bit of a U turn by offsetting all his travel now. . . . cop out. I get the impression he would say whatever to get peoples good opinion.

[johnriley1uk]

Never doubted that about Tony Blair. Does he really think we don't notice?

[Andy]

Blair infuriates me on his back-tracking but that is another issue and not one related to this topic.

On the subject of recycling - I agree wholeheartedly with it and try to do my best as I am sure a lot of people do. I think fining people for accidents is wrong. As I think the proposed extra charges for taking away my rubbish is wrong when I already pay a hefty whack towards council tax. And I mean, a hefty whack! I still fail to see what I am getting for it as well!

My rant is on car emissions. Why the hell are those tankers/old cars that are pumping fumes out at a horrendous level not taken to one side and told to get it sorted or they get a whacking great fine. The number of lorries that I see everytime I hit the motorway with fumes pouring out of them is ridiculous. I know the police can't be everywhere but there should be a tougher crackdown on these things.

[johnriley1uk]

We do try to reduce our wastage as much as we can, but without being obsessed with it. For example, I drive 45,000 miles a year as part of my job, so last time I opted for a smaller, more efficient car that reduced my Carbon emissions significantly. I can't do my job and not drive, so it seemed a common sense thing to do. We must have made a difference somewhere because our waste after Christmas was very very much less than in previous years. No trips to the Dump were needed at all.

So I think we should all do a little bit, be more thoughtful about disposal certainly, but I don't think that this government's bullying attitude will help at all. If they ask nicely, I'm sure most reasonable people would respond and do their bit. Collectively this would make some difference, but I'm afraid that as we do indeed only contribute 2% of the world's Carbon emissions then we are not going to save the world here in the UK.

It's also very difficult not to understand how China and others feel - they want their turn at having an Industrial Revolution and they want to make their economies grow strongly. Who can deny them that? If we can advise and assist in reducing the environmental impact that would be helpful, but they aren't going to give up their industrialisation....

[Mike]

Think to the future. We only account for 2% but when the others come around and realise the importance we will be market leaders in a whole new economy.

This particular government is not interested in bullying or the environment it is all about stealth taxes. Their entire policy system is based on squeezing the most out of the masses in the most difficult to track way possible. I think someone should employ an accountant to assess the actual tax rate in the UK after all stealths are added.

[mr_e]

Someone's already done the tax thing (the following refers to 2006):

Today (3rd June) was 'tax freedom day'. This means that the average person has worked until today to pay tax and the rest of the year is money you can keep for yourself! Of course tax isn't as simply as this. It is spread more evenly throughout the course of the year and taken into account with everything we earn and on every good or service we purchase.

This year tax freedom day comes three days later than last year and it is the latest it has been since 1988. At least things are not as bad as 1982 when it fell on 15th June! Source

It's frustrating seeing China and India repeat our mistakes in "how to industrialise the wrong way", ie with shedloads of pollution and massive migration to urban areas. I've probably said this before, but people are quite happy to do stuff about environmental issues, as long as it doesn't involve a perceived drop in their quality of living. Which is why I think we may be shafted. Plus for some reason major policy-makers still seem to think constant economic growth is possible in a closed system with finite exploitable resources (our planet), and use the "you can't prove global warming" line at every opportunity. It's basically a powerful elite (US and Chinese policy makers) playing Russian roulette with everyone else's lives.

John, I think you're referring to something like James Lovelock's "Daisyworld" model, but I think the system does have thresholds, and I have no idea how extreme they are. Holistic analysis of this sort is difficult, and not for the time of night I'm typing this.

I could practically write a mini essay on this, but I'm not sure everyone would read it. There were some very interesting transport emissions estimates I found which I need to post, though.

[Andy]

We must have made a difference somewhere because our waste after Christmas was very very much less than in previous years. No trips to the Dump were needed at all.

We didn't need any trips as well which was pleasing because so many people on our street collated loads and loads of rubbish. I found that due to clever packaging of my waste and using the recycling facilities on offer - waste paper bag, brown cardboard in the green bin, we managed two weeks without it overflowing. However, we did leave for a few days so it was more like a week and a half.

It's also very difficult not to understand how China and others feel - they want their turn at having an Industrial Revolution and they want to make their economies grow strongly. Who can deny them that? If we can advise and assist in reducing the environmental impact that would be helpful, but they aren't going to give up their industrialisation....

I can see their point in many ways and I have to say that I agree with them. However, I would have hoped that someone would have created a new, much simpler, more efficient and more environmentally way for progress to occur.

[John Knight]

By using our black box for tins bottles and plastic and our paper collection bag I find I can go two weeks without putting the bin out everytime!

I live in an area with extremely high council taxes, very good recyling services but terrible take up of the service. As a keen green (I have recently abondonded my car in favour of taking the train to work) it actually really annoys me that my council tax bill pays to bury all the rubbish my lazy arsed neighbours can't be bothered sorting out.

Fit my wheelie bin with a weighing chip by all means. Bring on Pay by weight waste services and reward the recycler's.

[mr_e]

We don't get plastic (I'm pretty sure it's plastic) collected, which is completely stupid, given the amount of plastic waste households tend to put out. Pay by weight combined with more accessible recycling facilities would be cool.

Oh, and here are those figures: these are given in kilograms of CO2, per seat, per 100 miles. They have been adjusted for embodied energy, and other gases have been converted to CO2 equivalent amounts. The per seat part's very important to note, as these figures assume full seat occupancy:

Road vehicles:
Family car (4 seats, 35mpg): 11.5kgs
Diesel car (4 seats, 55mpg): 6.5kgs
Sports car (2 seats, 18mpg): 43kgs
Minibus (14 seats, 20mpg): 4.5kgs
Intercity coach (50, 12mpg): 2.5kgs
Buses (varies): 2-3kgs

Trains:
Light rail/commuter trains: 1.5-2.5kgs
Intercity trains: 3-4.5kgs
High speed trains: 5-7.5kgs

Planes:
Short haul flights: 37kgs (15kgs)
Long haul flights: 25kgs (10kgs)
(Adjusted due to effects of CO2 in high atmosphere, fuel only figures in brackets)

From this we can deduce that empty public transport is bad pollution-wise, but is nevertheless needed for reasons of social inclusion. I think it makes interesting reading.

[John Knight]

Also we live in the windiest country in Europe. Yet up and down the country NIMBY's oppose the construction of wind turbines (even if they are 20 miles off the coast!). What would they prefer a nuclear waste silo?