Climate Change | UN Report: Code Red for humanity

United58 said:
I've worked minimum wage for years to be able to afford rent/car/college so anything above that is financially rewarding :D I love maths so Mechanical Engineering is great for me (so far, anyway).

I actually find that engineering seems a relatively popular choice now - loads of jobs there etc. (hope that's the case in 3 years too).

I'm pretty existential and nihilistic so I like to say feckit, we're all going to die anyway so if society is going to burn the world to the ground we might as well enjoy the time we have left, and do what we can ourselves (as insignificant as our input is vs massive corporations) to reverse it.
Click to expand...

In my opinion, the human attitude seems to need some form of major shock before we become motivated to actually do something.
As terrible as the Brazilian rain forest fires are, maybe, just maybe this will become that event that will initiate the required action.
I am an optimist by the way.
 
4bars said:
Unfortunately, is too late for this drastic changes as it will not come for the will of the people to change nor the governments will implement anything against the big coporations
Click to expand...

I think that has been the biggest hurdle. How can a government legislate and then remain in power.

We generate and buy so much that we do not need. I buy every thing to last because I don't like waste and only replace things when absolutely no other option. Some people are not quite so careful - a house near by was renovated, sold for 2 million and the new owner stripped everything.

I just think we can not keep taking from the planet crust at this rate. We can see the effects of climate change but there may be many things going on that we have absolutely no experience of.
 
Buster15 said:
In my opinion, the human attitude seems to need some form of major shock before we become motivated to actually do something.
As terrible as the Brazilian rain forest fires are, maybe, just maybe this will become that event that will initiate the required action.
I am an optimist by the way.
Click to expand...

I don't think we'll see any serious change until things start to badly affect the first world (governments won't care about third world countries).

I'm a pessimist.
 
Regulus Arcturus Black said:
A realist I'd say.
Click to expand...

Yeah I think the pessimistic outlook is the realistic outlook in terms of climate change, I'm just a naturally pessimistic person haha.

I've no interest in politics but I think this American election will be huge for climate change in the future, given Trump's complete denial and open mocking of it, and America's fuel consumption in general (as well as their relationship with China).
 
United58 said:
Yeah I think the pessimistic outlook is the realistic outlook in terms of climate change, I'm just a naturally pessimistic person haha.

I've no interest in politics but I think this American election will be huge for climate change in the future, given Trump's complete denial and open mocking of it, and America's fuel consumption in general (as well as their relationship with China).
Click to expand...
Hey @Eboue how was the last democratic president on climate change?
 
Nothing will be done until ice starts physically chasing Jake Gyllenhaal down a corridor. Only then will we act.
 
Climate change terrifies me but I see it as completely inevitable we will do nowhere near enough as a race.

The UK is nowhere near green enough yet we are easily 50-100 years ahead of many countries. I've been to India, Bangladesh and the Philippines this year. The pollution in these places is clear to see and heartbreaking. Plastic filling the rivers, unbelievable traffic in old vehicles etc. I tried using a bag for life and the supermarket wouldn't let me as I HAD to use their own branded single use plastic bags. We apparently have 15 years to really sort ourselves out yet I believe we will still be having this conversation for the rest of my lifetime (I'm 30).
 
Is there any clear guidance on what we need to do to help aside from recycling and installing green energies?
 
K13 said:
Is there any clear guidance on what we need to do to help aside from recycling and installing green energies?
Click to expand...

Individually, not much. Its an industrial problem primarily. Fly less, drive less, try to eat less meat are the main things i think

Hughes35 said:
Climate change terrifies me but I see it as completely inevitable we will do nowhere near enough as a race.

The UK is nowhere near green enough yet we are easily 50-100 years ahead of many countries. I've been to India, Bangladesh and the Philippines this year. The pollution in these places is clear to see and heartbreaking. Plastic filling the rivers, unbelievable traffic in old vehicles etc. I tried using a bag for life and the supermarket wouldn't let me as I HAD to use their own branded single use plastic bags. We apparently have 15 years to really sort ourselves out yet I believe we will still be having this conversation for the rest of my lifetime (I'm 30).
Click to expand...

Its 11 really. The 2016 Climate agreement (which america have left) was to cut emissions by 50% by 2030. 3 years on from that most have cut emissions by a few percent and often with the help of paying other countries to offset it, so its kind of a nonsense reduction.
 
Hughes35 said:
Climate change terrifies me but I see it as completely inevitable we will do nowhere near enough as a race.

The UK is nowhere near green enough yet we are easily 50-100 years ahead of many countries. I've been to India, Bangladesh and the Philippines this year. The pollution in these places is clear to see and heartbreaking. Plastic filling the rivers, unbelievable traffic in old vehicles etc. I tried using a bag for life and the supermarket wouldn't let me as I HAD to use their own branded single use plastic bags. We apparently have 15 years to really sort ourselves out yet I believe we will still be having this conversation for the rest of my lifetime (I'm 30).
Click to expand...
We’ll probably be spraying the stratosphere with sulfate aerosols within your lifetime at this rate because we’ll have passed the point of no return within natural processes.
 
Organic Potatoes said:
We’ll probably be spraying the stratosphere with sulfate aerosols within your lifetime at this rate because we’ll have passed the point of no return within natural processes.
Click to expand...

I agree to be honest, then 50 years after I die they will find out the aerosol spray gives everybody breathing difficulties and the cycle will continue.
 
caid said:
Individually, not much. Its an industrial problem primarily. Fly less, drive less, try to eat less meat are the main things i think.
Click to expand...

Thanks for that.

We also try to use less electricity/gas/coal/water/less online shopping so no packaging - I don't know if it helps or not but we want as a family to feel that we are contributing especially with 3 children under 21.
 
The UK is ahead of the curve when it comes to tackling climate change but as a relatively small nation, our efforts account for little against the pollution giants like the US, China and India.

Still, we can lead by example with regards to climate change. Shutting down coal fired power plants, using our own landscape to provide alternative means of energy.

Some things are less realistic, such as banning fossil fuel cars and replacing them with electric cars (which require huge amount of energy to create, the damage caused by lithium mining etc) within a few years.

Brexit will have little impact on our targets as we already go above and beyond many other nations and blocks, including the EU.

The mention of Brexit in here also brings up another questions. What impact does world trade have on the climate?

Would a push towards a more local economy be better for the environment. Local produce over shipping in foreign meats and veg?

Would people be happy to pay a little more for local goods? Or what about placing climate tariffs on some imported goods which can actually be sourced locally?
 
K13 said:
Is there any clear guidance on what we need to do to help aside from recycling and installing green energies?
Click to expand...
As a race we should stop consuming shit all the time. Every time someone earns a dollar there's a bit of CO2 emitted, that's the nature of it. Everything you buy is produced somewhere, then you have packaging and shipping as well. Buying services is less carbon intensive, generally.

But yeah, personal emission come from long distance flying and eating meat to a large degree. You can buy a whooole lot of single use plastic bags before you get close to the emissions from flying and eating.
 
WensleyMU said:
Would a push towards a more local economy be better for the environment. Local produce over shipping in foreign meats and veg?
Click to expand...
Most of the emissions associated with buying various produce comes from the production. The actual shipping of it is not very bad compared to the production. Simply put, it's better to eat veg from South America than eating meat from your local farm.
WensleyMU said:
Would people be happy to pay a little more for local goods? Or what about placing climate tariffs on some imported goods which can actually be sourced locally?
Click to expand...
Personally I think all carbon emissions from a given product should be taxed. That includes the production or shipping of it. If you want to have a price advantage on your product, you have to lower your emissions.
 
Maagge said:
Most of the emissions associated with buying various produce comes from the production. The actual shipping of it is not very bad compared to the production. Simply put, it's better to eat veg from South America than eating meat from your local farm.

Personally I think all carbon emissions from a given product should be taxed. That includes the production or shipping of it. If you want to have a price advantage on your product, you have to lower your emissions.
Click to expand...

Is there any credible evidence that food imported from 1000s of miles away is more environmentally sound than local produce?

Considering that in many cases, food sourced from South America, particularly food from Brazil, is farmed on land that was Amazon rainforest, before being cleared, this seems extremely unlikely.
 
WensleyMU said:
Is there any credible evidence that food imported from 1000s of miles away is more environmentally sound than local produce?

Considering that in many cases, food sourced from South America, particularly food from Brazil, is farmed on land that was Amazon rainforest, before being cleared, this seems extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...
Looking just at carbon emissions it's more important what you eat and how it was produced than where it came from. If you're already vegetarian/vegan transport accounts for a comparably larger fraction of the emissions than production but on average transport is only about 11 % of the total emissions associated with a given product. Plus shipping is by far the best way of transporting stuff as well. As soon as you get on trains and trucks (and plains) you emit more CO2 per km.

These guys found that buying everything local is about as good as removing a day's worth of meat from your weekly food.

When you buy wine on the east coast of the US you're better off buying it from France than California.

Then some others found that buying lamb from NZ in the UK has a smaller carbon footprint than just buying locally produced lamb. Because the production in the UK is (or was at the time) associated with way more emissions.
 
WensleyMU said:
The UK is ahead of the curve when it comes to tackling climate change but as a relatively small nation, our efforts account for little against the pollution giants like the US, China and India.

Still, we can lead by example with regards to climate change. Shutting down coal fired power plants, using our own landscape to provide alternative means of energy.

Some things are less realistic, such as banning fossil fuel cars and replacing them with electric cars (which require huge amount of energy to create, the damage caused by lithium mining etc) within a few years.

Brexit will have little impact on our targets as we already go above and beyond many other nations and blocks, including the EU.

The mention of Brexit in here also brings up another questions. What impact does world trade have on the climate?

Would a push towards a more local economy be better for the environment. Local produce over shipping in foreign meats and veg?

Would people be happy to pay a little more for local goods? Or what about placing climate tariffs on some imported goods which can actually be sourced locally?
Click to expand...

It'd probably make sense. Adjusting back to a seasonal diet where you just dont have access to certain things at different times of the year would probably help. Not sure its hugely significant and i can see the benefits that the range of food we have access to brings in terms of health. As far as acceptable or manageable costs that would probably be closer to the top of things I'd want to keep to some extent. I'm guessing at the cost of transport though.
Shouldn't apply to non perishables either. A TV that lasts 10-15 years from China is going to cost less than a TV from a local manufacturer that lasts 2 you'd think. Energy draw and reliability should be a bigger target in that regard.
 
Maagge said:
Personally I think all carbon emissions from a given product should be taxed. That includes the production or shipping of it. If you want to have a price advantage on your product, you have to lower your emissions.
Click to expand...

I think we should basically monetise clean air. Make it a situation where if you want to build / create something then you need to buy the air it costs, same as the water or electricity or metal. If theres no clean air on the market then ... I guess you either find a better way to create it, dont create it or plant a few trees to offset what you need.
 
WensleyMU said:
Is there any credible evidence that food imported from 1000s of miles away is more environmentally sound than local produce?

Considering that in many cases, food sourced from South America, particularly food from Brazil, is farmed on land that was Amazon rainforest, before being cleared, this seems extremely unlikely.
Click to expand...
I seem to recall reading that in cases like Brazil the exports are from viable farming operations, and the stuff grown on sketchy land is consumed domestically. So if you’re consuming imported goods they’re likely produced in a ‘normal’ fashion, but those volumes exported are balanced out internally by farming cleared rain forest habitat.

Would take some effort finding those articles though...
 
caid said:
I think we should basically monetise clean air. Make it a situation where if you want to build / create something then you need to buy the air it costs, same as the water or electricity or metal. If theres no clean air on the market then ... I guess you either find a better way to create it, dont create it or plant a few trees to offset what you need.
Click to expand...

That sort of 'environmental tax' should really be rolled out onto large corporations
 
Amazon is on fire for several weeks, wildlife at risk, and trump takes this disgraceful stance on it. How does American senate is totally silent on his stance even now.
 
Massive Spanner said:
Nothing will be done until ice starts physically chasing Jake Gyllenhaal down a corridor. Only then will we act.
Click to expand...
And the Americans were all taken in by Mexico.

Reality - millions of Americans get shot trying to get over the border by 10,000 Mexican troops. Donald Trump gets frozen trying to climb over his wall
 
golden_blunder said:
And the Americans were all taken in by Mexico.

Reality - millions of Americans get shot trying to get over the border by 10,000 Mexican troops. Donald Trump gets frozen trying to climb over his wall
Click to expand...
Hey, maybe climate change isn't such a bad thing after all?

We'd probably lose Cork but the rest of the island would be grand so I say feck it, burn all the peet!
 
Massive Spanner said:
Hey, maybe climate change isn't such a bad thing after all?

We'd probably lose Cork but the rest of the island would be grand so I say feck it, burn all the peet!
Click to expand...

Pretty shameful that thats still going. I know they're phasing it out but have they finished yet?
 
Organic Potatoes said:
I seem to recall reading that in cases like Brazil the exports are from viable farming operations, and the stuff grown on sketchy land is consumed domestically. So if you’re consuming imported goods they’re likely produced in a ‘normal’ fashion, but those volumes exported are balanced out internally by farming cleared rain forest habitat.

Would take some effort finding those articles though...
Click to expand...

This doesn't make sense. What I mean is "normal" methods. Plenty of agricultural land in Brazil, was at one point formerly rain-forest. Just like ALL agricultural land was formerly something else. In North America, much of "range" country was formerly forested. Prairie was grassland/lightly forested. The methods are the same. It's a matter of how recently the jungle was burned or cut back to make space for new farms. Brazil has enormous soy farms, that reside more and more on recently deforested land.

Simply put, if you're buying exported agricultural products from a country that is actively deforesting the Amazon, whether or not the produce came directly from recently deforested rain-forest, or distantly deforested rain-forest, or formerly grassland or whatever, you're fueling the entire process of expanding agriculture at the cost of deforestation.
 
Nucks said:
This doesn't make sense. What I mean is "normal" methods. Plenty of agricultural land in Brazil, was at one point formerly rain-forest. Just like ALL agricultural land was formerly something else. In North America, much of "range" country was formerly forested. Prairie was grassland/lightly forested. The methods are the same. It's a matter of how recently the jungle was burned or cut back to make space for new farms. Brazil has enormous soy farms, that reside more and more on recently deforested land.

Simply put, if you're buying exported agricultural products from a country that is actively deforesting the Amazon, whether or not the produce came directly from recently deforested rain-forest, or distantly deforested rain-forest, or formerly grassland or whatever, you're fueling the entire process of expanding agriculture at the cost of deforestation.
Click to expand...
Well, that's sort of my whole point. Even if the exports are grown on typical arable land, they're supplemented domestically by farming on recently deforested land which also happens to be of very poor quality and as such will not sustain agriculture in any environmentally friendly manner.
 
caid said:
I think we should basically monetise clean air. Make it a situation where if you want to build / create something then you need to buy the air it costs, same as the water or electricity or metal. If theres no clean air on the market then ... I guess you either find a better way to create it, dont create it or plant a few trees to offset what you need.
Click to expand...

I have often thought of a similar thing.
For example, when you drive a typical petrol engine car, it operates on a fuel/ratio (mixture) of 15:1. Which is 15 parts of air to 1 part of petrol. Diesels are slightly higher.
A modern jet engine is significantly more efficient with a 40:1 mixture.
Anyway. We pay for the fuel but expect the air to be free.
I doubt that we will ever be charged for the air. But it is an interesting point nonetheless.
 
United58 said:
I've worked minimum wage for years to be able to afford rent/car/college so anything above that is financially rewarding :D I love maths so Mechanical Engineering is great for me (so far, anyway).

I actually find that engineering seems a relatively popular choice now - loads of jobs there etc. (hope that's the case in 3 years too).

I'm pretty existential and nihilistic so I like to say feckit, we're all going to die anyway so if society is going to burn the world to the ground we might as well enjoy the time we have left, and do what we can ourselves (as insignificant as our input is vs massive corporations) to reverse it.
Click to expand...

Is existentialism and Nihilism a euphemism of lazy, selfish and full of excuses?

Don't get me wrong. I am the same way. I am mirroring and try to be less "Nihilist"
 
caid said:
I think we should basically monetise clean air. Make it a situation where if you want to build / create something then you need to buy the air it costs, same as the water or electricity or metal. If theres no clean air on the market then ... I guess you either find a better way to create it, dont create it or plant a few trees to offset what you need.
Click to expand...
We've already got carbon credits, exchanges..the whole shebang
 
4bars said:
Is existentialism and Nihilism a euphemism of lazy, selfish and full of excuses?

Don't get me wrong. I am the same way. I am mirroring and try to be less "Nihilist"
Click to expand...

I wouldn't say so. I'm not religious and 'believe' that there's no inherent point to life - no matter what we do, we will eventually die and rot. So will the universe one day with heat death.

This probably clashes with the idea of existentialism but I have bad anxiety and depression which push me to judge myself very harshly (a lot of the time to my benefit as I'll work much harder).

I would consider myself a selfish person
 
You must log in or register to reply here.