Sorry I meant the news report from the BBC. They aren't putting out an alarmist, everything's fucked report on the 6 o'clock news without knowing they've got the all clear from the government. They've always soft pedalled it before now.poprock wrote:I don’t think the report would have been suppressed in the past. It’s been done every seven or eight years, I think. What’s changed is the amount of available data for the report to draw on. Measuring climate change is now an entire scientific discipline in its own right. Last time the report came out, in 2014, it drew on three scientific studies. Three. This time it’s based on data from thousands. It’s conclusions are beyond reproach. (I picked that up yesterday on Twitter from one of the British authors who worked on the report. He also talked a lot about how supportive the UK Gov was during the reporting process - which surprised me.)monkey wrote:… that report wouldn't have gone out like that a couple of years ago and it wouldn't have gone out without the government approving the step up in rhetoric.
Actually got quite angry the other day when I was helping my daughter brush her teeth and she started nagging me about leaving the tap running (not angry at her, just the general anger at the modern world that the germans probably have a word for). "Mrs Miller says you should always try and save water blah blah blah".GooberTheHat wrote:Putting the emphasis on the end consumer is a tactic used by manufacturers. It's bullshit and they should be taxed based on their products lack of green friendliness.
GooberTheHat wrote:There are so many popular things they could do off the back of this though, it's insane that it's taken them so long to (think about) do anything substantial.
monkey wrote:Sorry I meant the news report from the BBC. They aren't putting out an alarmist, everything's fucked report on the 6 o'clock news without knowing they've got the all clear from the government. They've always soft pedalled it before now.
… I just think the political will is there now and politicians are now happy to have a report to point to so they have something to blame for all the unpopular things they need to do.
SpaceGazelle wrote:Oh spiffing. Covid barely had an impact on CO2 levels. https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-54074733
A report by the London-based think tank Carbon Tracker concludes that the COVID-19 pandemic may have pushed the fossil fuel industry into "terminal decline" as demand for oil and gas decreases while governments aim to accelerate the clean energy transition. It predicts that an annual 2% decline in demand for fossil fuels could cause the future profits of oil, gas and coal companies to collapse from an estimated $39tn to $14tn.[74][67] However, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance more than half a trillion dollars worldwide are currently intended to be poured into high-carbon industries.[75] Preliminary disclosures from the Bank of England's Covid Corporate Financing Facility indicate that billions of pounds of taxpayer support are intended to be funneled to fossil fuel companies.[75] According to Reclaim Finance the European Central Bank intends to allocate as much as €220bn (£193bn) to fossil fuel industries.[75] An assessment by Ernst & Young finds that a stimulus program that focuses on renewable energy and climate-friendly projects could create more than 100,000 direct jobs across Australia and estimates that every $1m spent on renewable energy and exports creates 4.8 full-time jobs in renewable infrastructure while $1m on fossil fuel projects would only create 1.7 full-time jobs.[76]In addition, also due to the effects of the COVID-19 pandemic on the fossil fuel and petrochemical industry, natural gas prices have dropped so low that gas producers were burning it off on-site (not being worth the cost to transport it to cracking facilities). Bans on single-use consumer plastic (in China, the European Union, Canada, and many countries in Africa), and bans on plastic bags (in several states in the USA) have also reduced demand for plastics considerably. Many cracking facilities in the USA have been suspended. The petrochemical industry has been trying to save itself by attempting to rapidly expand demand for plastic products worldwide (i.e. through pushbacks on plastic bans and by increasing the number of products wrapped in plastic in countries where plastic use is not already as widespread (i.e. developing nations)).[77]
nick_md wrote:I know how to shoot, used to be the only man out me, my brother and the old man who could hit the cans off the hedge every time with the air rifle (the sights were fucked, you had to aim up and to the right, they never figured that out). Went to a shooting range in Warsaw once, the old fella who ran it called me sniper, by the end he was bringing out his own personal collection of guns to show me. True story.
Escape wrote:I absolutely love motorbikes and couldn't afford an electric replacement (not even close), but if the gov offered like-for-like swaps I would. That's the real problem: governments need to subsidise our losses with eco-friendlier replacements, else those with the least are likely being asked to give up the most. In lifestyle terms, not monetary.Kidding aside. I'm ready to sacrifice some nature-averse comforts in my life - are you?
Yossarian wrote:Yeah, bollocks to that opinion piece. I’m planning not to have kids due to the state of the environment, I fully intend to have dogs at some point to provide some companionship that my later life will be sorely lacking.
Yossarian wrote:It is an opinion piece. It does reference a study, but it’s still an opinion piece.
LivDiv wrote:1998.
It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!