Honey I Broke the Planet

Matblack · 16-01-2007, 13:31

So, as we head into 2007 with flagship companies promising to completely change the way they do business to become carbon neutral an undeniable increase in UK tempretures, a decreasing polar ice cap and one of the largest countries in the world opening a new fossil fuel fired powerstatin every week, are we finally ready to admit that we have broken the planet? Can we turn around the changes we have already made and repair the damage or is it spiraling out of control?

I've been following climate change for a while, Heather and I recycle what we can, we use energy efficient light bulbs, we only have one car and I walk to work, we're probably average in the concientious stakes, but is it enough? It takes a lot of contientious yuppies to off set China opening power stations left right and centre, but then do we have a right to ask developing countries where having electric power in the home is a luxury to stop building powerstations? Can we really make a difference?

If I'm honest I'm not really THAT worried after all I don't have an electric car, I pay more in tax to keep a nice fast car which spews CO2 (I wonder if this is one of the causes behind the increase in inflation, as people pay more to keep what they have whilst knowing it polutes?). I can't be that worried can I?

What I wonder is what are WE i.e. the BD members willing to do to save the planet? Will we be the final generation who can live in the knowledge that we don't have to find a way off this planet which we have abused for so long. Have, behind the continious comments from the US that global warming is a load of old bull, they been developing a way to get off the planet or are we stuffed?

My opinion? I'm begining to think we've fluffed it, I suspect that our childern will have to make compromises because we can't do it, we're too self endulgent and love our big cars too much, we have the 'somebody elses problem' syndrome, after all what difference can just me having a 4 litre BMW X5 rather than a Honda Insight make in the grand scheme of things? None, right?

MB

Pebs · 16-01-2007, 15:16

I dont think anything really worthwhile will be done until something catastrophic happens or is on the brink of happening.

I must admit I do the bare minimum, and those efforts are probably negated by my car, or having the heating on 24 hours a day. I recycle some stuff but not nearly as much as I could.

Zirax · 16-01-2007, 15:25

Me, bored at work? Never. I have been following the rise of all this carbon neutrality thing with keen interest. Essentially most of the damage was done in the past few hundred years, maybe even longer.

If you really want to argue it dates back to when we first found fire. Lets just take from the industrial age where we started burning coal. By having access to this fuel, people were able to stay warmer and generally the living conditions improved. Previously a large number of elderly were killed in the winter each year through cold and getting the flu. Gradually our medical knowledge grew and we were able to cure more diseases which leads to a longer life span.

"The average life span in 1840, in the Whitechapel district of London, was 45 years for the upper class and 27 years for tradesman. Laborers and servants lived only 22 years on average." http://www.geocities.com/victorianmedicine/entire.html

"According to the 1851 census, for instance, the mean age of males in Great Britain as a whole was 25.87 years, only slightly up on the figures for 1841 (25.49 years) and 1821 (25.13 years); the mean lifetime in England was only 40 years."
http://www.victorianweb.org/vn/death/banjeree1.html

"The 1851 census showed that the population of Great Britain was roughly 18 million"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorian_era

So to clarify this you are likely if you are very wealthy to live to 45, and the average age is 25. There were 18 million people living in the entire uk. Now compare this to the 2001 concensus.

"The population of the United Kingdom on Census Day 2001 was 58,789,194"
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=185

"Over the last three decades, the median age of the UK population rose from 34.1 years in mid-1971 to 38.8 in mid-2005. This ageing is primarily the result of past trends in fertility, although recently declines in mortality rates especially at older ages have been playing a major role."
http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=949.

The situation is that the mortality rate just after birth is now very low again due to better medicine.
You are probably wondering where I am going with this, but bear with me. We now have over 3 times as many people living in the uk alone than during victorian times. Quite simply we aren't dieing fast enough. Now its great that we have good medicine, but bearing in mind that we are now living longer and there are more of us the effect is multiplied. Another good site to have a look at is here:-
http://www.nef.org.uk/energyadvice/co2emissionsyr.htm

This directly shows the emergence of victorian coal use alongside the population rise to present day. We on average emit 7-15 tonnes of fuel per person per year. Now we are still using coal powered stations in the uk which is dumping large amounts into the atmosphere. Compare this to France:-

"France is another European country with a lower than expected Carbon Dioxide output per person. The French climate is relatively temperate, but the real reason is that around 70% of its electricity comes from nuclear power."
http://www.nef.org.uk/energyadvice/co2emissionsctry.htm

My personal take on all this carbon neutrality is that we are being prepped slowly for a move to nuclear. Whenever building nuclear powerstations has been mentioned in the past it has been met with opposition. By gradually introducing this as the lesser evil, I feel that the government will be able to start building them. I feel that we have permenantly altered the planet through the use of fossil fuels. Hopefully this will be able to be stopped with the introduction of nuclear fusion.

I think gradually the planet will become more unfriendly to humans, causing our medicines to not be as effective, and our numbers to cut down. Think of it like the foxes and rabbits, loads of rabbits means foxes grow in numbers and kill more rabbits. The fewer rabbits causes the foxes to die out. How bad it will have to get is anyones guess.

Personally I recycle what I can but I have to get the train to work, which is powered by electricity, which comes from coal powerstations.

Mark · 16-01-2007, 16:16

I'm energy efficient in some ways but not in others, so it probably balances out. I recycle paper and cans, and I use energy efficient lighting. Unfortunately I keep a fleet of computers on 24/7 which uses a shedload of electricity. However, because if that, I don't use much gas.

I agree with Pebbles. It's going to take a disaster of biblical proportions (that means millions killed, not just the few hundred thousand that were killed by the last big tsunami) to get the world's leaders to step up. Right now even if the UK government carries out it's plans (who knows if they will) it will be instantly undone and then some by China and India. Then we have the USA who couldn't give a damn. Ignoring the argument over what caused it which I'd agree is debateable, they still think climate change doesn't even exist over there as can be evidenced by this ****wit:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6247371.stm

I've got news for you. Your high-paid job means precisely squat to me. This thing is happening right now. Get your ****ing head out of that sandpit and deal with it. Of course, we haven't even mentioned GWB himself yet.

It takes a lot for me to swear, but that idiot deserves it.

Dr. Z · 16-01-2007, 16:44

Woah, CO2?

Quote:

Originally Posted by [TW

Fox]

All this talking about carbon being bad, mmmkay, meaning that once again the British motorist is public enemy number one, and that we absolutely must encourage everyone to drive rubbish cars and take the bus to reduce the fact carbon will kill the entire planet.

Here are some facts to put the governments ridiculous carbon obsession into context:

Global Contributors of C02 Emissions:

Power Generation: 24%
Transport (including air, rail, car, ships) 14%
Industry: 14%
Heating: 8%
'Rotting waste': 3%

Cars account for just 11% of the UK's C02 output.

If every single SUV owner changed their car for a Toyota Prius Hybrid, the UK's total C02 emissions would decrease by just 0.3%

UK motorists contribute just 0.2% of world carbon emissions

Since 1990, UK Carbon emissions have gone up by just under 6%. Chinese Carbon emissions have gone up by just under 90%.

China plans to build nearly 600 coal fired power stations in the next 8 years. 18 of these power stations will emit, per year, the equivilent C02 of the ENTIRE UK motoring population.

If every single driver in the UK changed their car for a V8 powered Range Rover, world carbon emissions would increase by just 0.2%.

These figures, from this months Evo Magazine (I recommend you subscribe, its awesome), show several key things:

a) People whinging about carbon emissions should be quiet, becuase in the grand scheme of things, its no big deal
b) Changing say, a BMW 540i to a Smart Car becuase you want to be Carbon Neutral is totally pointless
c) All this eco claptrap from the government is hot air to deflect the attention from the fact it's just more tax.

There is a thread over there with all sorts of facts and figures and I am firmly in the "CO2 doesnt matter" camp. Well, not as much as everyone is making out

There is NOWHERE NEAR enough data to indicate one way or another that any climate change is down to human actions. Climate data from ice caps for as far back as they go shows that there are definite cycles but the data isnt granular enough to show 100 year fluctuations in temperature - we dont know that it wouldnt have happened anyway.

Just because two variables are moving at the same time doesnt prove cause and effect. Someone once posted a graph of the number of pirates vs average temperature and there appeared to be a correlation. Does that mean that we need more pirates to stop climate change? No it doesnt - and the current data set is EQUALLY as useless.

Anyway, all of that aside, if you really want to make a difference to the carbon side of things (despite things like water vapour being vastly more effective as "greenhouse gasses") plant trees. Or at least stop the rainforests from being demolished. Reversing that will restore the massive carbon sink we had, which is way, way more effective than everyone in the UK walking to work each day.

iCraig · 16-01-2007, 17:10

Isn't the Earth coming out of an ice-age? So our climate is heating up anyway? I think we've contributed to global warming, but not as much as we seem to think. Probably increased it's pace slightly.

Treefrog · 01-03-2007, 18:11

Quote:

Originally Posted by iCraig

Isn't the Earth coming out of an ice-age? So our climate is heating up anyway? I think we've contributed to global warming, but not as much as we seem to think. Probably increased it's pace slightly.

No, that was about 10,000 years ago. There's a view that says that the very severe winters back in the mid-1700s was the beginning of the next Ice Age, but was staved off by our increase in fossil fuel usage.

If the 10,000 years cycle of Ice Ages is continuing then we should expect the average temps to be sinking - which, by all accounts, they're not. I find it incredible that some people can be so stupid as to claim that humans have had nothing to do with it, and that GW is a purely natural affair.

Mark · 01-03-2007, 20:23

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treefrog

I find it incredible that some people can be so stupid as to claim that humans have had nothing to do with it, and that GW is a purely natural affair.

I've always been somewhat of this persuasion (though I wouldn't use the word stupid tbh), but having seen some of the results coming from the climate science projects I've been involved with for the last few years, I'm of this view more so than ever before.

It seems to be mostly the motor and oil industries that have the head-in-the-sand denial attitude, for obvious (financial) reasons. And I still include GWB in that (with his well known connections to oil), despite his recent comments. They have more to do with trying (and failing) to convince the green lobby to go away than actually doing anything.

Dr. Z · 01-03-2007, 21:18

Quote:

Originally Posted by Treefrog

No, that was about 10,000 years ago. There's a view that says that the very severe winters back in the mid-1700s was the beginning of the next Ice Age, but was staved off by our increase in fossil fuel usage.

If the 10,000 years cycle of Ice Ages is continuing then we should expect the average temps to be sinking - which, by all accounts, they're not. I find it incredible that some people can be so stupid as to claim that humans have had nothing to do with it, and that GW is a purely natural affair.

There is NOWHERE near enough data to call anyone "stupid" for leaning one way or the other. The fact that ice cores suggest that there are quite severe fluctuations in the weather over relatively short periods of time is enough to question the significance of any human input.

Mark · 16-01-2007, 18:22

Yup, to be absolutely clear. I did not and will not argue that humans are the cause of global warming, but I'm fairly sure we are a (i.e. one of several) factor though. You only have to look at the ozone hole to see how much of an impact humans can have on the planet.

Whether or not we are the primary factor in global warming is certainly debatable. In all honesty, I think not. Well, not yet. But, since this planet is the only home we have right now, wouldn't at least a bit of care make sense? If we can take reasonable steps to avoid the problem, if there is one, then let's do it. Note I said reasonable there - I'm not advocating anyone starts hugging trees.

16-01-2007, 13:31	#1
Matblack Baby Bore Join Date: Jun 2006 Location: Svalbard Posts: 9,770	Honey I Broke the Planet So, as we head into 2007 with flagship companies promising to completely change the way they do business to become carbon neutral an undeniable increase in UK tempretures, a decreasing polar ice cap and one of the largest countries in the world opening a new fossil fuel fired powerstatin every week, are we finally ready to admit that we have broken the planet? Can we turn around the changes we have already made and repair the damage or is it spiraling out of control? I've been following climate change for a while, Heather and I recycle what we can, we use energy efficient light bulbs, we only have one car and I walk to work, we're probably average in the concientious stakes, but is it enough? It takes a lot of contientious yuppies to off set China opening power stations left right and centre, but then do we have a right to ask developing countries where having electric power in the home is a luxury to stop building powerstations? Can we really make a difference? If I'm honest I'm not really THAT worried after all I don't have an electric car, I pay more in tax to keep a nice fast car which spews CO2 (I wonder if this is one of the causes behind the increase in inflation, as people pay more to keep what they have whilst knowing it polutes?). I can't be that worried can I? What I wonder is what are WE i.e. the BD members willing to do to save the planet? Will we be the final generation who can live in the knowledge that we don't have to find a way off this planet which we have abused for so long. Have, behind the continious comments from the US that global warming is a load of old bull, they been developing a way to get off the planet or are we stuffed? My opinion? I'm begining to think we've fluffed it, I suspect that our childern will have to make compromises because we can't do it, we're too self endulgent and love our big cars too much, we have the 'somebody elses problem' syndrome, after all what difference can just me having a 4 litre BMW X5 rather than a Honda Insight make in the grand scheme of things? None, right? MB __________________ "we had roots that grew towards each other underground, and when all the pretty blossom had fallen from our branches we found that we were one tree and not two"

16-01-2007, 15:16	#2
Pebs Easymouth Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 6,716	I dont think anything really worthwhile will be done until something catastrophic happens or is on the brink of happening. I must admit I do the bare minimum, and those efforts are probably negated by my car, or having the heating on 24 hours a day. I recycle some stuff but not nearly as much as I could. __________________ ...faster you naughty little monkey! Running through hell, heaven can wait!

16-01-2007, 16:16	#4
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	I'm energy efficient in some ways but not in others, so it probably balances out. I recycle paper and cans, and I use energy efficient lighting. Unfortunately I keep a fleet of computers on 24/7 which uses a shedload of electricity. However, because if that, I don't use much gas. I agree with Pebbles. It's going to take a disaster of biblical proportions (that means millions killed, not just the few hundred thousand that were killed by the last big tsunami) to get the world's leaders to step up. Right now even if the UK government carries out it's plans (who knows if they will) it will be instantly undone and then some by China and India. Then we have the USA who couldn't give a damn. Ignoring the argument over what caused it which I'd agree is debateable, they still think climate change doesn't even exist over there as can be evidenced by this **wit: http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6247371.stm I've got news for you. Your high-paid job means precisely squat to me. This thing is happening right now. Get your *ing head out of that sandpit and deal with it. Of course, we haven't even mentioned GWB himself yet. It takes a lot for me to swear, but that idiot deserves it. Last edited by Mark; 16-01-2007 at 16:18.*

16-01-2007, 17:10	#6
iCraig iCustom User Title Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 2,250	Isn't the Earth coming out of an ice-age? So our climate is heating up anyway? I think we've contributed to global warming, but not as much as we seem to think. Probably increased it's pace slightly. __________________

16-01-2007, 15:25	#3
Zirax Goes up to 11! Join Date: Jul 2006 Posts: 4,577	Me, bored at work? Never. I have been following the rise of all this carbon neutrality thing with keen interest. Essentially most of the damage was done in the past few hundred years, maybe even longer. If you really want to argue it dates back to when we first found fire. Lets just take from the industrial age where we started burning coal. By having access to this fuel, people were able to stay warmer and generally the living conditions improved. Previously a large number of elderly were killed in the winter each year through cold and getting the flu. Gradually our medical knowledge grew and we were able to cure more diseases which leads to a longer life span. "The average life span in 1840, in the Whitechapel district of London, was 45 years for the upper class and 27 years for tradesman. Laborers and servants lived only 22 years on average." http://www.geocities.com/victorianmedicine/entire.html "According to the 1851 census, for instance, the mean age of males in Great Britain as a whole was 25.87 years, only slightly up on the figures for 1841 (25.49 years) and 1821 (25.13 years); the mean lifetime in England was only 40 years." http://www.victorianweb.org/vn/death/banjeree1.html "The 1851 census showed that the population of Great Britain was roughly 18 million" http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Victorian_era So to clarify this you are likely if you are very wealthy to live to 45, and the average age is 25. There were 18 million people living in the entire uk. Now compare this to the 2001 concensus. "The population of the United Kingdom on Census Day 2001 was 58,789,194" http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=185 "Over the last three decades, the median age of the UK population rose from 34.1 years in mid-1971 to 38.8 in mid-2005. This ageing is primarily the result of past trends in fertility, although recently declines in mortality rates especially at older ages have been playing a major role." http://www.statistics.gov.uk/cci/nugget.asp?id=949. The situation is that the mortality rate just after birth is now very low again due to better medicine. You are probably wondering where I am going with this, but bear with me. We now have over 3 times as many people living in the uk alone than during victorian times. Quite simply we aren't dieing fast enough. Now its great that we have good medicine, but bearing in mind that we are now living longer and there are more of us the effect is multiplied. Another good site to have a look at is here:- http://www.nef.org.uk/energyadvice/co2emissionsyr.htm This directly shows the emergence of victorian coal use alongside the population rise to present day. We on average emit 7-15 tonnes of fuel per person per year. Now we are still using coal powered stations in the uk which is dumping large amounts into the atmosphere. Compare this to France:- "France is another European country with a lower than expected Carbon Dioxide output per person. The French climate is relatively temperate, but the real reason is that around 70% of its electricity comes from nuclear power." http://www.nef.org.uk/energyadvice/co2emissionsctry.htm My personal take on all this carbon neutrality is that we are being prepped slowly for a move to nuclear. Whenever building nuclear powerstations has been mentioned in the past it has been met with opposition. By gradually introducing this as the lesser evil, I feel that the government will be able to start building them. I feel that we have permenantly altered the planet through the use of fossil fuels. Hopefully this will be able to be stopped with the introduction of nuclear fusion. I think gradually the planet will become more unfriendly to humans, causing our medicines to not be as effective, and our numbers to cut down. Think of it like the foxes and rabbits, loads of rabbits means foxes grow in numbers and kill more rabbits. The fewer rabbits causes the foxes to die out. How bad it will have to get is anyones guess. Personally I recycle what I can but I have to get the train to work, which is powered by electricity, which comes from coal powerstations.

16-01-2007, 18:22	#10
Mark Screaming Orgasm Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newbury Posts: 15,194	Yup, to be absolutely clear. I did not and will not argue that humans are the cause of global warming, but I'm fairly sure we are a (i.e. one of several) factor though. You only have to look at the ozone hole to see how much of an impact humans can have on the planet. Whether or not we are the primary factor in global warming is certainly debatable. In all honesty, I think not. Well, not yet. But, since this planet is the only home we have right now, wouldn't at least a bit of care make sense? If we can take reasonable steps to avoid the problem, if there is one, then let's do it. Note I said reasonable there - I'm not advocating anyone starts hugging trees.