Vocal Voices

We might as well. The meeting in Madrid is falling apart with nobody able to agree on anything, but so what? Previous summits have seen promise made but never kept. Governments can promise all the political solutions they like but what they cannot do is control the global economy and that is where all the emissions are made and all the environmental damage is done. They also offer damn all regarding population - not one thing.

We might as well just keep on gobbling up the reserves, fouling the air and the waters and then see what nature throws at us, it's what we are doing anyway.

I think you are right. Frank.

I have thought all along that nothing will ever be done about the consequences of the climate change
that human activities will cause, until it is too late.

Sadly we still need to work on it. CO2 rose at its fastest rate on record in the last decade. It is nearly at 2.5ppm (parts per million), as a decadal average annual rise. Or 25ppm per decade.

Just a decade ago 350.org was set up to try and pressurise the countries of the world into reducing CO2 in the atmosphere down to 350ppm. Which is considered the max sustainable CO2 to retain a liveable biosphere (one which will support the humans on the planet)

In one more decade we will be in touching distance of 450ppm.

As a recap, Ice ages are around 180ppm. Interglacial average about 250ppm.

We are currently in an extended interglacial and we are driving the climate.

550ppm is considered a self sustaining level of CO2 where the breakdown of the permafrost and melting of methane nodules on the sea bed cause self sustaining CO2 growth with little chance of stopping it until the reservoirs of carbon dry up.

Those reservoirs contain more carbon than we have released in the last 200 years.

It is pitiful and the biggest growth in CO2 emissions are coming from the countries trying to split the concensus.

1st World CO2 emissions have halted growth, even in the US. Places like the UK have even shrunk how much we emit.

It is a mess alright. But, fear not, the planet will survive. Pity about the humans though..

There was something last week about the discovery of a huge methane release from the wetlands of South Sudan?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-50708544

How can you combat something occurring naturally like that?

Siloed thinking. In 2010 global sea levels dropped by 6mm. This was due to increased storminess, higher sea surface temperatures and the increased ability of the atmosphere to hold water due to higher temperatures.

Over the next 5 years it all fell to earth. Flooding some areas and greening others.

These dams were opened for a reason. The reason was too much water.

So, had we complied with Kyoto, this would have been much less likely. We didn't.

The Arctic is warming 10 times faster than the rest of the world and contains methane levels which make this look like a minor cowfart.

We should be doing something but we can't find the energy to procrastinate the decision...

Workingman wrote:They also offer damn all regarding population - not one thing.

There's a shock, said nobody at all.

When I mentioned that the projected growth of the Indian population, added to their 6% emissions growth, by 2040, would overwhelm the benefit of the entire EU going carbon neutral, I was told that I was using population in a poor country as an excuse...

Stupid is as stupid does.

I will admit I do not study these points like Suff or WM but surely as the likes of India / South America /Asian countries want to expand to get where the West IS they are going to produce More greenhouse gases than we can ever counteract

cromwell wrote:

Workingman wrote:They also offer damn all regarding population - not one thing.

There's a shock, said nobody at all.

Yes, it is so toxic even St Greta of Thunberg shies away from it.

I was watching a programme last night about Cola wars and some of the figures were frightening, but a good indication of where we are at.

The Coca-Cola plant at Wakefield is the biggest in Europe. It works 24/7/364, yes, it has a day off! Think of the money lost - oh my! Production is 1 billion litres of fizzy drinks every year at a rate of 6,000 units of varying types - cans and bottles - per minute or 3,144,960,000 a year to you and me. Exclusive of all manufacturing, plant operation and transport resource costs the "product" equals 6,200 tonnes of CO2 or 3,100 cars doing 16,000km per year; 113,000 tonnes of sugar needing 27.000 acres of land or an area 1/5 the size of Leeds; 16,800 tonnes of PET (plastic) and 9000 tonnes of aluminium.

That's one product in one factory!

What next? Burgers, cosmetics, fast fashion?

You will have to excuse me for not getting over enthused by an international group of government wonks wanting to curb CO2 by building windmills, banning straws and charging a bit more for a plastic bag when they are simultaneously making it into a commodity to be traded!

It's not a board game, you idiots!

But Vic, we are in the West so we are not allowed to say such things as they smack of colonialism and racism and probably a few 'isms' not yet invented.

No it is not a board game WM, it is a blame game where the government fails to lead and act to give us choices not to emit.

Then they make us feel responsible by telling us we are buying too many plastic bags and not buying the right light bulbs.

Yes we would love to drive non emitting electric vehicles. Once the techbologh catches up, you have increased the grid and prices have normalised at what they are today.

Now go do it!

Until such time I will not feel guilty.