IPCC Report

[Bjornebye]

Everyone just needs to stop farting. Animals too the dirty smelly gets. 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

 

 

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 10/11/2018 at 1:41 PM, moof said:

Only governments can sort it out. There’s very little anyone can alter in their personal lives that will effect our course. It will take political will. 

Good to see the leadership we're getting from our Government. 

 

In the five days since the report was published, they've scrapped grants for hybrid cars and fracking has restarted in Lancashire. 

[Spy Bee]

10 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Good to see the leadership we're getting from our Government. 

 

In the five days since the report was published, they've scrapped grants for hybrid cars and fracking has restarted in Lancashire. 

You couldn't fucking write it!

[AngryOfTuebrook]

This would be a good thread for Hades to remind us of the evils of Capitalism, as pretty much everything which is causing the problems and hampering the solutions is perfectly aligned to Capitalist "logic".

[moof]

3 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

Good to see the leadership we're getting from our Government. 

 

In the five days since the report was published, they've scrapped grants for hybrid cars and fracking has restarted in Lancashire. 

It’s amazing that people think we can change things by not eating meat 5 out of 7 days a week

[moof]

2 hours ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

This would be a good thread for Hades to remind us of the evils of Capitalism, as pretty much everything which is causing the problems and hampering the solutions is perfectly aligned to Capitalist "logic".

Capitalism uses up all the resources, by its very definition. If we want a habitable planet 50 years from now we need to smash capitalism. It’s that simple 

[Strontium]

I suppose the fact that Western capitalist democracies are literally the least polluted countries on the planet is neither here nor there. I mean, who wants to pay attention to fact when we can pull ideological nonsense from our rectums.

[Jairzinho]

The least polluting countries in the world are, by and large, the Scandi countries. Just as they are top of the list for pretty much all the other measures of a good country.

 

Presumably you're arguing in favour of more left wing economics. In which case, agreed.

[Jairzinho]

Although more broadly, and obviously, you could just point out that the utterly hateful aspects of rampant uncontrolled capitalism of some of the richest countries have a hugely detrimental and stifling effect on poorer countries ability to control pollution. You know, if the choice is between that and not producing enough energy/food/etc for people to live.

 

What effect has China, or the UK, or the World Bank, etc, had on Africa's ability to control pollution, for example? 

 

If Stronts is arguing in favour of a radically fairer global economic policy then obviously I am in full agreement. I fear he is not.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

53 minutes ago, Strontium Dog said:

 I mean, who wants to pay attention to fact when we can pull ideological nonsense from our rectums.

Indeed.

 

Presumably it's a fact that all pollution in every country was generated within the boundaries of that country. 

 

The point is, obviously enough, that Capitalism is all about consumption and growth  (i.e. ever-increasing consumption) - and that's the top and bottom of the problem of global warming. 

 

If you know differently, please share.

 

[AngryOfTuebrook]

100 companies responsible for 71% of global greenhouse gas emissions since 1988.

 

https://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/2017/jul/10/100-fossil-fuel-companies-investors-responsible-71-global-emissions-cdp-study-climate-change

[AngryOfTuebrook]

Capitalism is all about competition: it's a system of winners and losers.

 

The richest countries - Capitalism's "winners" - tend to also be the most polluting. The "losers" are the least polluting.

 

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_greenhouse_gas_emissions_per_capita

 

[Strontium]

1 hour ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

The point is, obviously enough, that Capitalism is all about consumption and growth  (i.e. ever-increasing consumption) - and that's the top and bottom of the problem of global warming. 

 

If you know differently, please share.

 

There's no reason at all why green technology can't be extremely profitable. Especially once you start dumping the cost of externalities onto polluters.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

1 hour ago, Strontium Dog said:

 

There's no reason at all why green technology can't be extremely profitable. Especially once you start dumping the cost of externalities onto polluters.

This is where we need serious action by governments of all the richest countries to invest heavily in green technologies; to make polluters pay for externalities; to alter consumer behaviours through taxes and subsidies; to set mandatory limits on permitted emissions; etc.

 

And we needed it to start 30 or 40 years ago.

 

Instead, we've gone full Capitalist, trusting the markets and promoting excessive  consumption instead of sustainability. 

[Red Shift]

On 10/11/2018 at 7:38 AM, Stickman said:

I'm all for helping the environment but how fucking boss was the weather today. 

I mean when have you ever been able to sit in the beer garden with just a shirt on  in the middle of October?......

Silver-linings and all that I guess 

Short term - we’ll be in Paradise. Unfortunately, paradise will be transitioning into hell.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 10/10/2018 at 7:38 PM, Stickman said:

I'm all for helping the environment but how fucking boss was the weather today. 

I mean when have you ever been able to sit in the beer garden with just a shirt on  in the middle of October?......

Silver-linings and all that I guess 

And then a couple of days later half the country was under flood water.

 

Get used to it.

[Strontium]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-45838997

[Jairzinho]

Would you support a ban, or serious restrictions, on the sale of meat in the UK, Stronts?

[Strontium]

Absolutely not. But I would factor the cost of cleaning up the mess it causes into the price.

 

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Meat_tax

[RedPaul]

If we, the people, who vote for our governments and their policies, really cared so much about this issue (compared to all other issues) then we would vote for a political party that put this issue top of the agenda. We would also take personal responsibility and do everything we can as individuals to mitigate our own contribution to this mess, of which there are many things we can do.

 

But very few people act or vote accordingly, ergo, the problem worsens, the predictions become more catastrophic, but nothing really changes. We will only really react to the problem when some of the worst predicted human effects actually start to be felt by ourselves as individuals and as societies. An example of an environmental issue that scared the shit out of people and politicians which took relatively little time to organise a global response to was ozone depletion. No sooner did people and politicians realise the horrific potential scale of the problem and see it actually happening before their eyes (i.e. ozone holes, cancer, etc...) they acted. The problem with climate change is that such horrific effects are not being felt yet or at least not being felt in a dramatic human sense that enough people accept are directly a result of climate change. By the time we realise they are happening to us as a result of all the shit we've pumped into our atmosphere it will be too late as we will not have acted soon enough.

 

For me, the whole capitalism/socialism argument is a bit of a red herring as I don't think either side of that spectrum has covered itself in glory over the years in terms of environmental responsibility. Climate change is about all humanity and its future. It's about us as people, as individuals, as society, local, regional and global. We can do something about it, but not enough people (at the moment) really care enough to act. This isn't top of most people's agendas or topics of conversation and until it is, very little effective change will happen. We, the people, have the power to effect change, it just needs enough of us to do it, enough of us to care enough about this singular issue and take action.

[AngryOfTuebrook]

On 10/13/2018 at 1:25 PM, moof said:

It’s amazing that people think we can change things by not eating meat 5 out of 7 days a week

You don't think it would help?

 

The meat industry is a massive source of greenhouse gas emissions  (not to mention the deforestation, water use, etc.) If every meat eater took 2 days a week off - a move which would cause them no hardship and would improve their health  - then a significant chunk of the problem would be solved.

[Jairzinho]

1 hour ago, RedPaul said:

If we, the people, who vote for our governments and their policies, really cared so much about this issue (compared to all other issues) then we would vote for a political party that put this issue top of the agenda. We would also take personal responsibility and do everything we can as individuals to mitigate our own contribution to this mess, of which there are many things we can do.

 

But very few people act or vote accordingly, ergo, the problem worsens, the predictions become more catastrophic, but nothing really changes. We will only really react to the problem when some of the worst predicted human effects actually start to be felt by ourselves as individuals and as societies. An example of an environmental issue that scared the shit out of people and politicians which took relatively little time to organise a global response to was ozone depletion. No sooner did people and politicians realise the horrific potential scale of the problem and see it actually happening before their eyes (i.e. ozone holes, cancer, etc...) they acted. The problem with climate change is that such horrific effects are not being felt yet or at least not being felt in a dramatic human sense that enough people accept are directly a result of climate change. By the time we realise they are happening to us as a result of all the shit we've pumped into our atmosphere it will be too late as we will not have acted soon enough.

 

For me, the whole capitalism/socialism argument is a bit of a red herring as I don't think either side of that spectrum has covered itself in glory over the years in terms of environmental responsibility. Climate change is about all humanity and its future. It's about us as people, as individuals, as society, local, regional and global. We can do something about it, but not enough people (at the moment) really care enough to act. This isn't top of most people's agendas or topics of conversation and until it is, very little effective change will happen. We, the people, have the power to effect change, it just needs enough of us to do it, enough of us to care enough about this singular issue and take action.

Capitalism, in it's current form, ensures people can't care about it.

 

People neither have the time or money to be sourcing organic foods, recycling to the nth degree, buying electric cars, etc, etc. They can't because they're fucking poor, despite working 12 hours a day. They're going to fucking food banks. Asking them to give a shit about this stuff is insulting. And that's just in the developed world. 

 

Moof is right. You can't change this stuff without changing how the global economy is run. It doesn't fucking matter if I put plastics in the right box etc if McDonalds is still chopping down football pitch size bits of forest every eight seconds. 

 

If you have an economic system that puts competition ahead of co-operation, and allows hateful sociopathic billionaires to do whatever they want, the globe is fucked. 

[Jairzinho]

45 minutes ago, AngryofTuebrook said:

You don't think it would help?

 

The meat industry is a massive source of greenhouse gas emissions  (not to mention the deforestation, water use, etc.) If every meat eater took 2 days a week off - a move which would cause them no hardship and would improve their health  - then a significant chunk of the problem would be solved.

And how would you go about that?

 

Some leaflets? I'm not being flippant...ok, I am being flippant, but unless someone rings Ronald McCunt and says "the games up, pal. No more aiming adverts at eight year olds, no more bribing local authorities for planning permission, etc", fuck all is going to happen. 

 

Making meat more expensive isn't the answer, in my opinion. It's a punish the poor policy.

[Spy Bee]

On 10/14/2018 at 10:21 PM, Jairzinho said:

If you have an economic system that puts competition ahead of co-operation

That was Darwin's main finding, but it's somehow been spun into Survival of the Fittest.