Code RED - the end maybe nigh!

[MikeSharp01]

Today has been a depressing day and so I thought I would express my frustration and see how we feel. The 'CODE RED' report from the IPCC (https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Full_Report.pdf) is not the reason for my depression but rather it brings into sharp (no pun intended) focus the challenges we just are not facing up to and our principal politicians (not leaders because leaders are able to make, explain and garner a following around difficult decisions) seem incapable of facing the facts , developing the options, choosing the path, getting us all aboard and making the changes we clearly need before we incinerate ourselves.

 

Even if you subscribe to the ideas circulated by Nick Bostrum (and many others before and since) that we are living in a simulation - created by a super intelligence to simulate the actions of their forbears, perhaps prior to a subsequent extinction event as one could see it - IE there is nothing watching this simulation any more, it seems that we have found a way of breaking the simulator!

 

Also hoping the super intelligence will offer a simple reboot is perhaps far fetched given that we are just expendable avatars of their forbears and they are watching how the simulation plays out or they are just not watching any more and the simulation just keeps on running in the supercomputer they invented - although a few seconds later they invented a better / faster computer but are / were using it for more important things.  

 

So we need to get this fixed or perhaps we don't - discuss!

[Des Ingham]

It is an extremely depressing situation Mike, on the one hand government ministers pay lip service to taking action to prevent further climate change, on the other they give the go-ahead to a new oil drilling project off Shetland that will create huge carbon emissions for the next 25 years. Business and energy minister Kwasi Karteng on TV this morning professed that they would offset the damage this new development would do by using carbon capture technology. Let us remind ourselves that this technology does not even exist right now and many sceptics believe it will never be an option! 

I think we all have to do our bit and put pressure on the powers that be to act and show them that it is in their best interests to act. I think it may be too late but we can`t give up, we have nowhere else to run have we? 

[Ferdinand]

I've been debating this on a politics site today, and it has been between the "Climate Emergency" approach and the "Get on with the nitty-gritty" approach, if there is a conflict / contrast. I think the conflict / contrast is more defined by the politics than the need to act.

 

 

[ProDave]

My overwhelming thoughts are the sheer enormity of the task, and I don't believe we have a government capable and competent to make the changes needed.

 

Housing stock.  Just WHO, how and when are the UK's mostly poor houses going to get updated?  Who is going to pay etc?

 

Transport.  I don't believe EV's are the answer unless electricity generation gets significantly greener and more of it, I just don't see that happening quick enough.

 

And other nations that continue to burn coal in power stations, unless they stop the rest of us are p*****g in the wind.

[SteamyTea]

There has been nothing that surprised, or depressed, me in the latest report.

I think there is so much going on behind the scenes that we forget that it can be done.

Many developing areas are skipping the grid infrastructure phase and going for distributed RE generation.  This is the best thing to do.  We can cheaply and easily lift million, if not billions, out of fuel scarcity for very little cash, and certainly a lot less planning (remember we, in the UK cannot build the cheapest RE generation on our land).

It is us old legacy industrialised countries that seem slow.

 

The big question is what do we want to preserve, is it our existing lifestyles, cottages by the sea, Rangerovers and BMWs.

Or do we want to help create a more equitable world.

Sadly I think we voted to preserve what we think we deserve (in the UK).

 

I could copy and past this weeks New Scientist, which is all about RE.

 

OR YOU CAN GO OUT AND BUY A COPY.

 

 

[nod]

8 hours ago, Des Ingham said:

It is an extremely depressing situation Mike, on the one hand government ministers pay lip service to taking action to prevent further climate change, on the other they give the go-ahead to a new oil drilling project off Shetland that will create huge carbon emissions for the next 25 years. Business and energy minister Kwasi Karteng on TV this morning professed that they would offset the damage this new development would do by using carbon capture technology. Let us remind ourselves that this technology does not even exist right now and many sceptics believe it will never be an option! 

I think we all have to do our bit and put pressure on the powers that be to act and show them that it is in their best interests to act. I think it may be too late but we can`t give up, we have nowhere else to run have we? 

I posted a similar point recently 

Government's are relying on technology that doesn’t yet exist 

Putting HPs in homes with poor airtightness is pointless 

Most of these cleaner heating systems will be power by plants still using coal or gas 

 

Edited August 10, 2021 by nod

[epsilonGreedy]

9 hours ago, MikeSharp01 said:

our principal politicians (not leaders because leaders are able to make, explain and garner a following around difficult decisions) seem incapable of facing the facts , developing the options, choosing the path, getting us all aboard and making the changes we clearly need before we incinerate ourselves.

 

 

Our politicians just want power and so they are a reflection of us. Beyond a highly selective community like BuildHub most humans cannot afford to indulge in your imagined reality. The only incineration I see is in the brain cells of the worried western rich, it is like watching a privileged Victorian Duchess have a "touch of the vapours".

 

Climate Change hysteria is just another chapter in the saga of the willful self destruction of western society. It started with Effete Christianity in the late Victorian period, then we adopted big state socialism, followed by a nationalized academia and now climate change hysteria, this is just societal self immolation on a national scale.

 

The answer is very simple, turn off the BBC, don't read the Guardian and relax in the knowledge that the historical and geological record demonstrate we have 100's or 1000's of years to devise a solution to rising CO2. The next 50 years are going to be rather nice with rising food production, deserts will turn green and there will be more sunny UK staycations.

[SteamyTea]

16 minutes ago, epsilonGreedy said:

deserts will turn green

Been looking, and struggling to find one.

https://earthengine.google.com/timelapse/

[SteamyTea]

1 hour ago, nod said:

Putting HPs in homes with poor airtightness is pointless 

Putting a too small heating system in any home is pointless.  Don't mix up the technology with the requirements.

1 hour ago, nod said:

power by plants still using coal

Not much coal generation left now.  The rest will be phased out in the next few years.  Replaced with off shore wind most probably, and possibly some nuclear, but that seems to be struggling.

Edited August 10, 2021 by SteamyTea

[epsilonGreedy]

7 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

Been looking, and struggling to find one.

 

 

NASA (which specialises in climate change alarmism these days) found the evidence.

 

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/ames/human-activity-in-china-and-india-dominates-the-greening-of-earth-nasa-study-shows

[ProDave]

7 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

 

Not much coal generation left now.  The rest will be phased out in the next few years.  Replaced with off shore wind most probably, and possibly some nuclear, but that seems to be struggling.

Until we stop burning wood at Drax, I have no faith in anyone who is planning our "carbon neutral" generation.

 

As for Nuclear, the present ones under construction or planning seem a bureaucratic, late, over cost money pit under the control of foreign countries.  A GREAT embarrassment for a nation that pioneered nuclear power and one upon a time we could design and build our own.

[epsilonGreedy]

11 minutes ago, SteamyTea said:

Not much coal generation left now.  The rest will be phased out in the next few years.  Replaced with off shore wind most probably, and possibly some nuclear, but that seems to be struggling.

 

 

Err. Gas powered generation !!!

[Happy Valley]

As eluded to it is the larger nations such as China and the US that need to step up and show the world how the future should be. The problem we have is an ever growing global population that all require (if they can) a good or better standard of living than their forebears. 

 

I watched a re-run of Portillo on a train in Australia last night. He was in Newcastle NSW close to the Queensland border and in one year their port exported more coal from a massive open cast mine than the UK produced in total over 50 years ago. They had 2000 acres of coal sitting in the port waiting to be loaded onto boats to places like Japan. It's stuff like this that makes our contribution insignificant - not that we shouldn't attempt to lead and educate.

Edited August 10, 2021 by Happy Valley

[SteamyTea]

7 minutes ago, epsilonGreedy said:

 

Err. Gas powered generation !!!

I was referring to coal only.  That is why I quoted that part.

(Exclamation marks should never be used, unlike question marks)

[SteamyTea]

5 minutes ago, Happy Valley said:

As eluded to it is the larger nations such as China and the US that need to step up and show the world how the future should be.

We can help there.  Shall be boycott buying their food and products.  The industries that we have exported.

 

You can see who is good and bad here.

https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/EN.ATM.CO2E.PP.GD?view=map 

[Vijay]

37 minutes ago, Happy Valley said:

The problem we have is an ever growing global population that all require (if they can) a good or better standard of living than their forebears.

 

Personally I think you've hit the nail on the head. People don't contemplate the amout of children they have (eith a ripple effect) with older people living longer - we all need/want more and more with the mass population and the human race is taking every last thing this planet has

[markc]

Answer to climate change is pretty simple really, 50% cut in population.

I wonder how many climate activists would volunteer to do their bit.

[Ralph]

6 minutes ago, markc said:

Answer to climate change is pretty simple really, 50% cut in population.

I wonder how many climate activists would volunteer to do their bit.

Depends on what country we are talking about. Remove 1,000 people from USA and I think you're removing 18,420 T per year of C02. India would be 1,960. The UK would be 5,620. 

We don't fly or commute very much and have a pretty efficient house. I make a bit effort not to eat food with high air miles and most of the meat we eat is wild. Probably the biggest thing we have done is not having children and that was not for any ecological reason (just can't be arsed with kids). 

 

In fact most of our choices are for lifestyle rather than ecological but I suspect that even if everyone in the UK lived like us it would make little difference to climate change.

[joe90]

36 minutes ago, markc said:

Answer to climate change is pretty simple really, 50% cut in population.

David Attenborough has been saying this for years, I did think perhaps Coronavirus was the Gaia principle protecting the planet?

[Bitpipe]

It's the classic boiling frog scenario.

 

Once the discomfort is evident to the masses they will demand action but will it then be too late - or take too long to have any impact?

 

I skimmed the Daily Mail in the shop today  - saw a glimmer of hope in their position of 'it may be expensive now but will be much more expensive if we do nothing' so maybe that message will start to resonate.

 

The other challenge we face is that government policy making, globally, is inherently short term and selfish - the fundamental calculation is always let's do what is popular & avoid what is unpopular so we can stay in power.

 

Climate aside we see this with education, healthcare, long term social care etc, etc.

 

 

[Ferdinand]

2 hours ago, markc said:

Answer to climate change is pretty simple really, 50% cut in population.

I wonder how many climate activists would volunteer to do their bit.

 

The quickest way to achieve that is to make everyone rich, which minimises the need for "children for security".

[Bitpipe]

2 hours ago, markc said:

Answer to climate change is pretty simple really, 50% cut in population.

I wonder how many climate activists would volunteer to do their bit.

 

Boris has obviously not got the memo.

[Ralph]

1 hour ago, joe90 said:

David Attenborough has been saying this for years, I did think perhaps Coronavirus was the Gaia principle protecting the planet?

I'm not sure of the numbers but it can't have taken out more than 0.05% of the population. It's going to take something much more significant to have any effect. Short of a slate wiping event I can't see anything making enough of a difference to population, not in the short to medium term. 

 

However we did see the effect that changes in behavior can have. I read that there was a 7% drop in c02 emissions in 2020 because of the global lockdown. Just shows you the level of change that is going to be needed to.

[joe90]

3 minutes ago, Ralph said:

it can't have taken out more than 0.05% of the population.

what I meant was at the beginning of the pandemic when we didn’t have a vaccine I wondered if it would escalate and have taken out a large percentage of the population like the Black Death etc. Then again if it had happened many years ago before modern medicine etc was so effective I wonder what the total death toll would have been?

[Ralph]

7 minutes ago, joe90 said:

Then again if it had happened many years ago before modern medicine etc was so effective I wonder what the total death toll would have been?

Right enough,  look at India, while not brilliant there is significant levels of healthcare compared to other countries and they may have lost 4 million people to it depending on who you believe.