Global Warming

[Bishop Hibee]

I don't normally post beyond the football boards but I'm interested to know what members on here think about this.

I've recycled since the first bins were set up at the old Scotmid at the foot of the Walk but it's clear to me we've moved way beyond this. George Monbiot recently commented along the lines that tinkering round the edges was pointless and what was needed was everyone adopting a more plant based diet and not flying anymore. Seems unlikely that anyone will pay much attention to this sadly. As with action on smoking and the plastic bag charge, it'll take legislation to enforce change. It'll be a brave government that stops people flying on holiday and brings in meat rationing!

Personally, I'm eating more veggie meals but I can't see myself giving up lorne sausage or bolognese anytime soon.

[Smartie]

I don't normally post beyond the football boards but I'm interested to know what members on here think about this.

I've recycled since the first bins were set up at the old Scotmid at the foot of the Walk but it's clear to me we've moved way beyond this. George Monbiot recently commented along the lines that tinkering round the edges was pointless and what was needed was everyone adopting a more plant based diet and not flying anymore. Seems unlikely that anyone will pay much attention to this sadly. As with action on smoking and the plastic bag charge, it'll take legislation to enforce change. It'll be a brave government that stops people flying on holiday and brings in meat rationing!

Personally, I'm eating more veggie meals but I can't see myself giving up lorne sausage or bolognese anytime soon.

Rome wasn't built in a day, so a start like that is good.

You see all the good work that is being done here to take things in a particular direction then you get depressed when you see how much in denial others are (most of the USA).

Education is huge, and decent evidence is often required. There has been as big a shift towards veganism and vegetarianism as I can ever remember in recent years. When people are faced with evidence of the consequences of their actions then they will often change their behaviour. Without it, they won't.

What exactly constitutes "evidence" in the social media/ fake news era, I don't know.

The key, as ever, lies with the money men. As long as you have people making so much money out of oil then there will be denial of all sorts of undeniable truths (the same will probably be true for certain foodstuffs etc).

When big business topples to a point where more money is made of our renewables than finite resources, and when there is a bigger commercial demand (for whatever reason) for vegetarianism that carnivorism then that is when major change will happen.

[Colr]

Feels like we’re reaching a tipping point on vehicles emmissions.

Little real opposition to the ULEZ here and it’ll be exyended to resi areas soon such as where I live.

If they could install on street charging points it would result in a big switch over, I think.

[Ozyhibby]

More capitalism is the key. The richer a country gets the greener it gets. China is now cutting back on coal and moving massively into renewables.
I’m all for the climate protests because I think we can do a lot more than we are doing but the solutions advocated by the protesters are complete nonsense.
Govt has a role to play in pushing us towards greener choices, but it’s the market that will supply the innovation that will solve the problem.
And cut back on red meat for your health as much as for the planet. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

Climate change, rather than global warming.

Being pedantic while the overall global temperature is rising it is the extreme weather that is more noticeable. The downpour, the drought, the wildfire.

[AgentDaleCooper]

More capitalism is the key. The richer a country gets the greener it gets. China is now cutting back on coal and moving massively into renewables.
I’m all for the climate protests because I think we can do a lot more than we are doing but the solutions advocated by the protesters are complete nonsense.
Govt has a role to play in pushing us towards greener choices, but it’s the market that will supply the innovation that will solve the problem.
And cut back on red meat for your health as much as for the planet. [emoji3]


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That is, to say the least, debatable...Brazil is going in a more capitalist direction, but also doing everything it can to destroy the planet. Also, how are the UAE, Qatar etc. doing on the renewables front? They are the 5th and 1st respectively in the GDP per capita tables.

In Europe, Norway and other Skandanavian countries do very well (Switzerland and Luxembourg are the top two, probably because of their banking/money laundering sector :wink:), despite being by far the furthest to the left in Europe for decades. Despite 50% taxes, they lead the way in renewables.

...so it seems to me that it isn't only lefties that let their ideologies blinker their vision to facts :wink:

[hibsbollah]

More capitalism is the key. The richer a country gets the greener it gets

I've read some nonsense on here but that's takes some beating. I actually prefer the Trump approach of not giving a damn. At least it's honest.

Mark Carneys joint speech with the head of the French national Bank yesterday is potentially very important in terms of taking the debate beyond the bead wearing chanting element and influencing the polluters themselves. What he was describing was an existential threat to capitalism; the insurance sector simply cannot survive the payouts that were a result of 2018s Californian wildfires. The financial returns from fossil fuels that capitalism depends on is time limited and that time is coming to an end. All these things require new solutions or the global system itself will not continue.

[Ozyhibby]

I've read some nonsense on here but that's takes some beating. I actually prefer the Trump approach of not giving a damn. At least it's honest.

Mark Carneys joint speech with the head of the French national Bank yesterday is potentially very important in terms of taking the debate beyond the bead wearing chanting element and influencing the polluters themselves. What he was describing was an existential threat to capitalism; the insurance sector simply cannot survive the payouts that were a result of 2018s Californian wildfires. The financial returns from fossil fuels that capitalism depends on is time limited and that time is coming to an end. All these things require new solutions or the global system itself will not continue.

I agree with Carney. The solution though will come from new technology and only capitalist countries can consistently invent the new tech we need.
Government has a big role to play by providing the right incentives to encourage companies to act in the right way.
Much is made of what Trump says but thankfully America seems to be ignoring him. They are moving more and more towards taking carbon out of their economy. Although Trump pulled them out of the Paris agreement they are still moving towards its targets quicker than some European countries.
The solutions to this will never come from denying people the things they have now. It will come from delivering it in a greener way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

I agree with Carney. The solution though will come from new technology and only capitalist countries can consistently invent the new tech we need.
Government has a big role to play by providing the right incentives to encourage companies to act in the right way.
Much is made of what Trump says but thankfully America seems to be ignoring him. They are moving more and more towards taking carbon out of their economy. Although Trump pulled them out of the Paris agreement they are still moving towards its targets quicker than some European countries.
The solutions to this will never come from denying people the things they have now. It will come from delivering it in a greener way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Couldn't agree more. And I'd add you can't realistically deny people in developing economies the things they don't have now that we do.

[hibsbollah]

I agree with Carney. The solution though will come from new technology and only capitalist countries can consistently invent the new tech we need.
Government has a big role to play by providing the right incentives to encourage companies to act in the right way.
Much is made of what Trump says but thankfully America seems to be ignoring him. They are moving more and more towards taking carbon out of their economy. Although Trump pulled them out of the Paris agreement they are still moving towards its targets quicker than some European countries.
The solutions to this will never come from denying people the things they have now. It will come from delivering it in a greener way.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think you've missed the implications of what Carney is saying.

You said the answer to the climate crisis is 'more capitalism'.

Carney is saying something very different to that, very important and very fundamental. At some point, we have to stop measuring economic prosperity in terms of pure growth.

It's not about 'denying people what they have now'. It's about making decisions that do not always maximise short term profit. There is literally no point in you and me recycling plastic bottles and putting them in the bottle bank every Wednesday like good little citizens if the oil companies who make the plastic continue to increase production by 40% in the last three years. Which they are. And that is a deliberate policy by the likes of Rex Tillerson, ex Exxon chief who before he fell out with Trump was charged with increasing pollution and production when Exxon knew before anyone else the impact.

At some point, bankers and CEOs have to make decisions to stop rewarding unfettered growth. And yes, you absolutely have to deny people in developing countries the means to have three cars in their garage like we do. Because it's not sustainable.

[Moulin Yarns]

I watched the David Attenborough documentary last night, jings was it depressing.

[hibsbollah]

Couldn't agree more. And I'd add you can't realistically deny people in developing economies the things they don't have now that we do.

Then you disagree with what Carney is saying. Because that's precisely what has to happen.

[Ozyhibby]

I think you've missed the implications of what Carney is saying.

You said the answer to the climate crisis is 'more capitalism'.

Carney is saying something very different to that, very important and very fundamental. At some point, we have to stop measuring economic prosperity in terms of pure growth.

It's not about 'denying people what they have now'. It's about making decisions that do not always maximise short term profit. There is literally no point in you and me recycling plastic bottles and putting them in the bottle bank every Wednesday like good little citizens if the oil companies who make the plastic continue to increase production by 40% in the last three years. Which they are. And that is a deliberate policy by the likes of Rex Tillerson, ex Exxon chief who before he fell out with Trump was charged with increasing pollution and production when Exxon knew before anyone else the impact.

At some point, bankers and CEOs have to make decisions to stop rewarding unfettered growth. And yes, you absolutely have to deny people in developing countries the means to have three cars in their garage like we do. Because it's not sustainable.

They can have three cars so long as they are emission free as far as I’m concerned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

I think you've missed the implications of what Carney is saying.

You said the answer to the climate crisis is 'more capitalism'.

Carney is saying something very different to that, very important and very fundamental. At some point, we have to stop measuring economic prosperity in terms of pure growth.

It's not about 'denying people what they have now'. It's about making decisions that do not always maximise short term profit. There is literally no point in you and me recycling plastic bottles and putting them in the bottle bank every Wednesday like good little citizens if the oil companies who make the plastic continue to increase production by 40% in the last three years. Which they are. And that is a deliberate policy by the likes of Rex Tillerson, ex Exxon chief who before he fell out with Trump was charged with increasing pollution and production when Exxon knew before anyone else the impact.

At some point, bankers and CEOs have to make decisions to stop rewarding unfettered growth. And yes, you absolutely have to deny people in developing countries the means to have three cars in their garage like we do. Because it's not sustainable.

It's not sustainable if they all run on petrol. It might be if they're electric.

I do agree governments are going to have to get a lot more interventionist.

[Ozyhibby]

Then you disagree with what Carney is saying. Because that's precisely what has to happen.

I would need to see the whole speech but the paragraph posted does not say that?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[JeMeSouviens]

Then you disagree with what Carney is saying. Because that's precisely what has to happen.

I was agreeing with Ozy, I haven't read what Carney said.

It's just not fair for pious westerners to tell the rest of the world they can't have what we've enjoyed.

[hibsbollah]

They can have three cars so long as they are emission free as far as I’m concerned.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

You don't think there's an environmental impact in manufacturing emission free cars?

[hibsbollah]

I was agreeing with Ozy, I haven't read what Carney said.

It's just not fair for pious westerners to tell the rest of the world they can't have what we've enjoyed.

It is fair. You may as well give up on the planet otherwise.

[JeMeSouviens]

You don't think there's an environmental impact in manufacturing emission free cars?

If we get a low carbon economy right, then eventually there's a low carbon impact in manufacturing anything.

Carney's speech is here btw, https://www.bankofengland.co.uk/-/media/boe/files/speech/2019/a-new-horizon-speech-by-mark-carney.pdf

[JeMeSouviens]

It is fair. You may as well give up on the planet otherwise.

The planet will be fine in the long run. Human civilisation might take a few thousand years of a step back though.

[hibsbollah]

The planet will be fine in the long run. Human civilisation might take a few thousand years of a step back though.

That's an incredibly complacent assumption.

[JeMeSouviens]

That's an incredibly complacent assumption.

If you call the threat of potentially billions of people dying complacent, then yes, I suppose it is. :confused:

[AgentDaleCooper]

The planet will be fine in the long run. Human civilisation might take a few thousand years of a step back though.

Yeah, and which societies will be hit hardest?


The ones whose right to burn fossil fuels you care about so much.

[hibsbollah]

If you call the threat of potentially billions of people dying complacent, then yes, I suppose it is. :confused:

Perhaps I missed the irony between your first and second sentence!

[AgentDaleCooper]

This thread shows that for some, capitalism is a religion and a matter of faith.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yeah, and which societies will be hit hardest?

The poorest.

I'm not trying to minimise the threat to humanity (and lots of other species) but in the long run the planet will still be covered in diverse life. It's human-centric arrogance to assume otherwise.

[JeMeSouviens]

Perhaps I missed the irony between your first and second sentence!

I think you might have. :greengrin

[Ozyhibby]

This thread shows that for some, capitalism is a religion and a matter of faith.

A religion? Hardly. It just makes people richer and is the best system we have. There is nothing else comes close to providing the level of prosperity that free markets do.
If you can show me a better system I’m willing to switch so it surely can’t be an article of faith for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

A religion? Hardly. It just makes people richer and is the best system we have. There is nothing else comes close to providing the level of prosperity that free markets do.
If you can show me a better system I’m willing to switch so it surely can’t be an article of faith for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Nobody brought Capitalism into the discussion before you did. You're actually sounding a bit preachy about it so I can understand the criticism that it's a matter of faith for you. Capitalism is the world orthodoxy. And it is the system under which the planet is now so degraded that a Canadian arch free marketeer is now warning us that we have to change our ways. But you think what the planet needs is more capitalism? How can we even get more capitalism?

[Ozyhibby]

Nobody brought Capitalism into the discussion before you did. You're actually sounding a bit preachy about it so I can understand the criticism that it's a matter of faith for you. Capitalism is the world orthodoxy. And it is the system under which the planet is now so degradated that a Canadian arch free marketeer is now warning us that we have to change our ways. But you think what the planet needs is more capitalism? How can we even get more capitalism?

I meant capitalism in more places.
I brought it up because I think the protests this week have been a massive success in highlighting the issues and forcing people to talk about it and I’m supportive of them but the solutions the protesters advocate are usually the wrong ones in my opinion. If that makes sense.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

These are fascinating, and frightening.

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-46384067

[One Day Soon]

I was agreeing with Ozy, I haven't read what Carney said.

It's just not fair for pious westerners to tell the rest of the world they can't have what we've enjoyed.


There's absolutely nothing wrong with capitalism, it's the natural state of human affairs if nothing external intervenes where goods and services are exchanged.

But there's quite a lot wrong with capitalism when governments collectively are unable or unwilling to agree effective regulation in order to moderate, alter or restrict how the capitalist system operates.

I completely agree that non-Western nations should be able and have the right to pursue the best of what the advanced modern economies benefit from: good healthcare, a wide range of consumer products, safety and security, excellent education, good housing, effective transportation systems, stable and high quality food supplies. In fact there is more than enough resource available in the world for most if not all countries to have these things and in an environmentally stable way.

There are three core drivers for change to fix all this: technological advance, market regulation and changes in human behaviour.

The technological change is a matter of both government investment and capitalist advance. The sheer volume of innovation and change required globally means that this is an enormous growth opportunity for players in the capitalist system, whether they be makers of low emission vehicles, developers of effective scale carbon capture schemes, developers of alternative food chain development and supply or a thousand other tech/innovation possibilities. Governments need to help make markets in these things - for example as has been done in many places elsewhere with deposit return schemes to support the development of a recycle/reuse economy.

Market regulation is simple to describe and set. Much, much harder to agree. If you can get agreements though on emissions etc the impact could be massive and quite quite quickly too.

Human behavioural change is central in all this - from travel habits through to what and how we eat, consume, reuse etc. Only one thing impacts the capitalist market more than regulation and that's consumer behaviour. That's why so many serious environmentalist voices are now saying that we shouldn't just be waiting or hoping for government action - if every single one of us takes the actions we are capable of in our every day lives then our collective impact upon the global capitalist ecosystem would be enormous.

You're right JMS, the planet will be fine. Humans not so much, unless we get our collective act together. My conclusion is that Western and advanced industrial countries will not take this as seriously as is needed until we take some heavy collateral damage, by which I mean something like serious food shortages or competition over water resources.

If I were a betting man - which I am - my money would be on the majority of the solution to all this coming from two places - western innovation and Chinese state action. The first driven by a desire to capitalise on the economic opportunity and the second driven by both the need to preserve an internal political hegemony and the desire to continue to roll out external global economic influence.

[JeMeSouviens]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with capitalism, it's the natural state of human affairs if nothing external intervenes where goods and services are exchanged.

But there's quite a lot wrong with capitalism when governments collectively are unable or unwilling to agree effective regulation in order to moderate, alter or restrict how the capitalist system operates.

I completely agree that non-Western nations should be able and have the right to pursue the best of what the advanced modern economies benefit from: good healthcare, a wide range of consumer products, safety and security, excellent education, good housing, effective transportation systems, stable and high quality food supplies. In fact there is more than enough resource available in the world for most if not all countries to have these things and in an environmentally stable way.

There are three core drivers for change to fix all this: technological advance, market regulation and changes in human behaviour.

The technological change is a matter of both government investment and capitalist advance. The sheer volume of innovation and change required globally means that this is an enormous growth opportunity for players in the capitalist system, whether they be makers of low emission vehicles, developers of effective scale carbon capture schemes, developers of alternative food chain development and supply or a thousand other tech/innovation possibilities. Governments need to help make markets in these things - for example as has been done in many places elsewhere with deposit return schemes to support the development of a recycle/reuse economy.

Market regulation is simple to describe and set. Much, much harder to agree. If you can get agreements though on emissions etc the impact could be massive and quite quite quickly too.

Human behavioural change is central in all this - from travel habits through to what and how we eat, consume, reuse etc. Only one thing impacts the capitalist market more than regulation and that's consumer behaviour. That's why so many serious environmentalist voices are now saying that we shouldn't just be waiting or hoping for government action - if every single one of us takes the actions we are capable of in our every day lives then our collective impact upon the global capitalist ecosystem would be enormous.

You're right JMS, the planet will be fine. Humans not so much, unless we get our collective act together. My conclusion is that Western and advanced industrial countries will not take this as seriously as is needed until we take some heavy collateral damage, by which I mean something like serious food shortages or competition over water resources.

If I were a betting man - which I am - my money would be on the majority of the solution to all this coming from two places - western innovation and Chinese state action. The first driven by a desire to capitalise on the economic opportunity and the second driven by both the need to preserve an internal political hegemony and the desire to continue to roll out external global economic influence.

Like.

Although one quibble, capitalism/market economy has only been the natural state of human affairs since we outpopulated our ability to hunt/gather. In societies where that never happened, eg. Australian aborigines, it never developed.

[AgentDaleCooper]

A religion? Hardly. It just makes people richer and is the best system we have. There is nothing else comes close to providing the level of prosperity that free markets do.
If you can show me a better system I’m willing to switch so it surely can’t be an article of faith for me.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Your belief in the free market seems to be an article of faith, because you contend that the free-er the market, the more prosperous people get and the greener the society (unless you either accept or can refute the following...)

Scandinavian countries have very high tax rates, a large public sector, yet have some of the highest GDPs in Europe (as well as some of the lowest inequality ratings, which results in less crime...but that's another debate), whilst crucially lead the way in renewable energy.

so, your contention that free markets = richer countries* (if you mean GDP per person) + greener society seems to be baloney.

I would also contend that innovation is far more dependent on good education that it is on free markets.


*That is unless you include Switzerland, Luxembourg and the Gulf countries, which you are welcome to, if you are happy to bite the bullet on their many short comings, and with the latter, also accept that they are about as green as Craig Levein.

[hibsbollah]

There's absolutely nothing wrong with capitalism, it's the natural state of human affairs if nothing external intervenes where goods and services are exchanged.

But there's quite a lot wrong with capitalism when governments collectively are unable or unwilling to agree effective regulation in order to moderate, alter or restrict how the capitalist system operates.

I completely agree that non-Western nations should be able and have the right to pursue the best of what the advanced modern economies benefit from: good healthcare, a wide range of consumer products, safety and security, excellent education, good housing, effective transportation systems, stable and high quality food supplies. In fact there is more than enough resource available in the world for most if not all countries to have these things and in an environmentally stable way.

There are three core drivers for change to fix all this: technological advance, market regulation and changes in human behaviour.

The technological change is a matter of both government investment and capitalist advance. The sheer volume of innovation and change required globally means that this is an enormous growth opportunity for players in the capitalist system, whether they be makers of low emission vehicles, developers of effective scale carbon capture schemes, developers of alternative food chain development and supply or a thousand other tech/innovation possibilities. Governments need to help make markets in these things - for example as has been done in many places elsewhere with deposit return schemes to support the development of a recycle/reuse economy.

Market regulation is simple to describe and set. Much, much harder to agree. If you can get agreements though on emissions etc the impact could be massive and quite quite quickly too.

Human behavioural change is central in all this - from travel habits through to what and how we eat, consume, reuse etc. Only one thing impacts the capitalist market more than regulation and that's consumer behaviour. That's why so many serious environmentalist voices are now saying that we shouldn't just be waiting or hoping for government action - if every single one of us takes the actions we are capable of in our every day lives then our collective impact upon the global capitalist ecosystem would be enormous.

You're right JMS, the planet will be fine. Humans not so much, unless we get our collective act together. My conclusion is that Western and advanced industrial countries will not take this as seriously as is needed until we take some heavy collateral damage, by which I mean something like serious food shortages or competition over water resources.

If I were a betting man - which I am - my money would be on the majority of the solution to all this coming from two places - western innovation and Chinese state action. The first driven by a desire to capitalise on the economic opportunity and the second driven by both the need to preserve an internal political hegemony and the desire to continue to roll out external global economic influence.

Theres a few things to be said about that, although I agree with the main thrust of the analysis.

The eventual aim of living in an environmentally sustainable way is dependent on political factors. The two drivers you mention about technological advancement (tech developments are NOT an inevitable consequence of living under a capitalist system, its a result of human endeavour, otherwise the Russians wouldnt have been the first into space:greengrin)and market regulation are wholly dependent on power structures agreeing to moderate excesses of human behaviour.

The most obvious examples how power structures threaten us are in the Americas; Trump deliberately violating (or 'withdrawing from' in his words) the Kyoto protocols, and Bolsonaro's stated ambition to develop the hell out of the Amazon rainforest 'because its ours'. These right wing, populist, free market demagogues are threatening all of us, and your third driver, human behavioural change, will struggle to make much of a difference in the face of just these two examples of the power structures that make all of this so intractable. The heavy collateral damage is coming, id be amazed if it wasnt in the next ten years. Obviously we, as individual members of the human race, should all change our behaviour now, anyway, regardless of the absolute ********s running the show. So we clearly need to be politically engaged as well as behaviorally (?)engaged. Demand better from our leaders.

Again, moving from the abstract into the real world, there is a product on the shelves of every garden centre in the country called Rose Clear. (blue bottle, avoid it) It works really well in keeping aphids off your flowering plants. Unfortunately, it contains neonicitinoids that kill bees which obviously threatens human existence. The EU voted to ban neonics last year. But the manufacturers are keeping it on the shelves in the UK because of Brexit. Again, politics.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/further-restrictions-on-neonicotinoids-agreed
It is not technological advancement that is going to come up with a replacement for Rose Clear. It's going back to old methods of horticulture that worked perfectly well before we got so lazy.

I'm also fascinated by this apparent confidence that 'the planet will be fine' even if the human race suffers. There is literally no evidence as to whether or not a planet that supports life can survive when an ecosystem is degraded by humans. Id imagine scientists can only guess, just like the rest of us. Sylar might have a view? On one level, its all semantics, human life on Earth is most definitely at risk.

[Ozyhibby]

Your belief in the free market seems to be an article of faith, because you contend that the free-er the market, the more prosperous people get and the greener the society (unless you either accept or can refute the following...)

Scandinavian countries have very high tax rates, a large public sector, yet have some of the highest GDPs in Europe (as well as some of the lowest inequality ratings, which results in less crime...but that's another debate), whilst crucially lead the way in renewable energy.

so, your contention that free markets = richer countries* (if you mean GDP per person) + greener society seems to be baloney.

I would also contend that innovation is far more dependent on good education that it is on free markets.


*That is unless you include Switzerland, Luxembourg and the Gulf countries, which you are welcome to, if you are happy to bite the bullet on their many short comings, and with the latter, also accept that they are about as green as Craig Levein.

You can have free markets with higher tax rates. Scandinavian countries have very free markets.
I made it clear I think govt has a massive role to play and can nudge the market to provide the changes we need.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

Theres a few things to be said about that, although I agree with the main thrust of the analysis.

The eventual aim of living in an environmentally sustainable way is dependent on political factors. The two drivers you mention about technological advancement (tech developments are NOT an inevitable consequence of living under a capitalist system, its a result of human endeavour, otherwise the Russians wouldnt have been the first into space:greengrin)and market regulation are wholly dependent on power structures agreeing to moderate excesses of human behaviour.

The most obvious examples how power structures threaten us are in the Americas; Trump deliberately violating (or 'withdrawing from' in his words) the Kyoto protocols, and Bolsonaro's stated ambition to develop the hell out of the Amazon rainforest 'because its ours'. These right wing, populist, free market demagogues are threatening all of us, and your third driver, human behavioural change, will struggle to make much of a difference in the face of just these two examples of the power structures that make all of this so intractable. The heavy collateral damage is coming, id be amazed if it wasnt in the next ten years. Obviously we, as individual members of the human race, should all change our behaviour now, anyway, regardless of the absolute ********s running the show. So we clearly need to be politically engaged as well as behaviorally (?)engaged. Demand better from our leaders.

Again, moving from the abstract into the real world, there is a product on the shelves of every garden centre in the country called Rose Clear. (blue bottle, avoid it) It works really well in keeping aphids off your flowering plants. Unfortunately, it contains neonicitinoids that kill bees which obviously threatens human existence. The EU voted to ban neonics last year. But the manufacturers are keeping it on the shelves in the UK because of Brexit. Again, politics.
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/further-restrictions-on-neonicotinoids-agreed
It is not technological advancement that is going to come up with a replacement for Rose Clear. It's going back to old methods of horticulture that worked perfectly well before we got so lazy.

I'm also fascinated by this apparent confidence that 'the planet will be fine' even if the human race suffers. There is literally no evidence as to whether or not a planet that supports life can survive when an ecosystem is degraded by humans. Id imagine scientists can only guess, just like the rest of us. Sylar might have a view? On one level, its all semantics, human life on Earth is most definitely at risk.

Russia might have sent the first man into space but the have not invented very much since at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[hibsbollah]

Russia might have sent the first man into space but the have not invented very much since at all.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

OK. Point taken. It was a very small part of what my argument and the :greengrin smiley was there for a reason.


Edit-Actually, maybe they dont invent much anymore because they embraced capitalism?? :faf:

[Ozyhibby]

OK. Point taken. It was a very small part of what my argument and the :greengrin smiley was there for a reason.


Edit-Actually, maybe they dont invent much anymore because they embraced capitalism?? :faf:

I’m not sure what they have is capitalism. The levels of corruption mean that it’s almost impossible to do business there.
I agree with you though that govt has a big job to do.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[AgentDaleCooper]

You can have free markets with higher tax rates. Scandinavian countries have very free markets.
I made it clear I think govt has a massive role to play and can nudge the market to provide the changes we need.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

how are you defining free markets, exactly? i assumed market freedom was measured by amount of a) regulation and b) private ownership

[hibsbollah]

how are you defining free markets, exactly? i assumed market freedom was measured by amount of a) regulation and b) private ownership

By most measures, you'd call the Scandinavian economies social democratic mixed economies. I'm not sure if its factually incorrect to call Sweden 'free market', but it's certainly not neo liberal in the sense that the UK or the US is.

Where Finland and Sweden are definitely different from what we're used to is income equality. I worked in Finland for a bit and there wasn't a great deal between the wages of middle management in a global firm and the guy who came in to change the water dispenser in the same firm. Which I thought was brilliant as you'd probably imagine.

[One Day Soon]

By most measures, you'd call the Scandinavian economies social democratic mixed economies. I'm not sure if its factually incorrect to call Sweden 'free market', but it's certainly not neo liberal in the sense that the UK or the US is.

Where Finland and Sweden are definitely different from what we're used to is income equality. I worked in Finland for a bit and there wasn't a great deal between the wages of middle management in a global firm and the guy who came in to change the water dispenser in the same firm. Which I thought was brilliant as you'd probably imagine.


I'm not sure it can be credibly argued that the UK has a neo-liberal economy. The NHS and EU regulations alone would argue against that. Perhaps a debate for another thread.

[Bristolhibby]

It's not sustainable if they all run on petrol. It might be if they're electric.

I do agree governments are going to have to get a lot more interventionist.

Interventionist. Something that isn’t the flavour of the day at the moment.

J

[RyeSloan]

As a small aside to this thread I see US company Beyond Meat (purveyor of plant based burgers) is due to float on the NYSE with a valuation of near $1.5bn.

Not bad for a company with sales of under $100m and loses about a quarter of that but probably reflective of the huge growth expected in this sector.

[JeMeSouviens]

£5.50 for 2 (probably mingin) frozen burgers. Hmmmmm.

https://www.tesco.com/groceries/en-GB/products/301595088?sc_cmp=ppc*GHS+-+Grocery+-+New*PX+%7C+Shopping+GSC+%7C+Top+Offers*New:+F%26D :+Frozen+Food:+Frozen+Food+-+Top+Offers*PRODUCT_GROUP301595088*&ds_rl=1116019&ds_rl=1116322&ds_rl=1116019&gclid=Cj0KCQjw5J_mBRDVARIsAGqGLZBMGmkGtWrcGbFfFifv 7p8i2u0cjov0E9z8C-4ekcM-2aqLfOwE0uUaAreeEALw_wcB&gclsrc=aw.ds

[James310]

As a small aside to this thread I see US company Beyond Meat (purveyor of plant based burgers) is due to float on the NYSE with a valuation of near $1.5bn.

Not bad for a company with sales of under $100m and loses about a quarter of that but probably reflective of the huge growth expected in this sector.

Went to Five Guys tonight for the first time. My bill was not to far off that valuation it felt like.

[hibsbollah]

Monbiot on the media
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2019/30/april/the-george-monbiot-guide-to-political-journalism

It is amazing how little stuff about the ongoing climate disaster is on the TV news or newspapers in any format. Even when there is a flood or a tsunami or another event that is clearly linked to climate change, the cause or the pattern of similar events is rarely explained. It's really time to put the planet right at the front of political thinking.

[Pretty Boy]

I know a few people who live a vegan lifestyle. They often despair at a lot of the media output from vegan groups as it is often negative in it's message and imagery and they prefer to highlight the positive aspects.

I can't imagine going 'full vegan' but I definitely think a lot more about what I eat and where it comes from these days. One thing I do think about a lot now is seasonality. It's become an expectation that we can get soft fruits, asparagus, avocado etc etc all year round. When you read the country of origin on a lot of these products it's quite scary to consider the distance they have traveled just so we can eat some poor quality strawberries in January. I think part of the issue is a loss of traditional skills. Easy access to whatever we want all year round has seen a lot of people choose convenience over learning how to make soup, stews, casserole, preserves, chutneys and so on.

Obviously times change but the current methods of food consumption are unsustainable. As with the whole single use plastic issue I actually think consumer conscience is, to an extent, ahead of infrastructure and corporate responsibility. I firmly believe the changes required simply have to be consumer led. Withhold your custom from companies who refuse to acknowledge and deal with the issues and they will respond accordingly.

[Ozyhibby]

I know a few people who live a vegan lifestyle. They often despair at a lot of the media output from vegan groups as it is often negative in it's message and imagery and they prefer to highlight the positive aspects.

I can't imagine going 'full vegan' but I definitely think a lot more about what I eat and where it comes from these days. One thing I do think about a lot now is seasonality. It's become an expectation that we can get soft fruits, asparagus, avocado etc etc all year round. When you read the country of origin on a lot of these products it's quite scary to consider the distance they have traveled just so we can eat some poor quality strawberries in January. I think part of the issue is a loss of traditional skills. Easy access to whatever we want all year round has seen a lot of people choose convenience over learning how to make soup, stews, casserole, preserves, chutneys and so on.

Obviously times change but the current methods of food consumption are unsustainable. As with the whole single use plastic issue I actually think consumer conscience is, to an extent, ahead of infrastructure and corporate responsibility. I firmly believe the changes required simply have to be consumer led. Withhold your custom from companies who refuse to acknowledge and deal with the issues and they will respond accordingly.

We can make it sustainable by improving our farming techniques. The Dutch are the world’s 3rd biggest food exporters with a similar climate to us and not that much bigger a country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Pretty Boy]

We can make it sustainable by improving our farming techniques. The Dutch are the world’s 3rd biggest food exporters with a similar climate to us and not that much bigger a country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

That was essentially part of my point.

We are importing mountains of food from the Netherlands throughout the winter because there is obviously demand for it.

There are 2 options. Either educate people about seasonality and try to put the genie back in the bottle or develop our own farming practices to meet demand. Growing your own food is sustainable whether that incorporates traditional seasonality or otherwise. Flying or shipping food from Chile, Morocco, Israel and The Netherlands throughout the winter simply isn't.

[Jones28]

We can make it sustainable by improving our farming techniques. The Dutch are the world’s 3rd biggest food exporters with a similar climate to us and not that much bigger a country.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

Interesting observations on The Netherlands, I work in farming and went to do some digging (pun fully intended) and saw the the export of flowers account for a huge amount of their exports - €9.1billion in 2017 in fact.

Another point about Scotland is that one of our biggest markets is the demand for malting barley from the whisky market, so most of our cropping is dedicated to that. Further, we may be similar in size but we have a relatively small amount of the highest quality land for growing the likes of soft fruit, brassicas and the like. I couldn't find an equivalent map for The Netherlands but from what I could see from a quick google is they have a lot more land that is usable for combinable cropping .

We do need to improve our techniques and focus on maximising the land we do have, but to an extent you can only piss with the cock you've got.

[Callum_62]

Went to Five Guys tonight for the first time. My bill was not to far off that valuation it felt like.

[emoji23] one of the most overpriced places ive ever been

£5.20 for a small milkshake?!

To be fair there cajun chips are very good


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[lapsedhibee]

Monbiot on the media
https://www.doubledown.news/watch/2019/30/april/the-george-monbiot-guide-to-political-journalism

It is amazing how little stuff about the ongoing climate disaster is on the TV news or newspapers in any format. Even when there is a flood or a tsunami or another event that is clearly linked to climate change, the cause or the pattern of similar events is rarely explained. It's really time to put the planet right at the front of political thinking.

Maybe hairsplitting but I don't think tsunamis are caused by climate change, though their effects on humans may be worsened by it.

[JeMeSouviens]

Scottish government accepts advice from the UK's Climate Change Committee (an independent body set up by UK gov) to go for net-zero by 2045:


Committee chairman Lord Deben said: "Scotland has been a leader within the UK with many of its policies to tackle climate change.

"By setting a strong net-zero target for 2045 it can continue that leadership on the world stage.

"It will be tough, but it can be done and Scotland's strong track record positions it well to succeed."

It's amazing how the SG doesn't sound so terribly, dreadfully evil when described by people not grinding axes. :wink:

Having said that, the CCC is probably a secret Nazi front. :aok:

[hibsbollah]

Maybe hairsplitting but I don't think tsunamis are caused by climate change, though their effects on humans may be worsened by it.

Correct, hence I said 'linked to' not 'caused by', just in case there were any pedants reading:greengrin

[Moulin Yarns]

Maybe hairsplitting but I don't think tsunamis are caused by climate change, though their effects on humans may be worsened by it.

Although when a glacier calves an iceberg it often causes a tsunami, but the source is usually so far away from land there is no impact. One could argue that sometimes that is a result of global warming, or raised mean temperature due to climate change

[lapsedhibee]

Although when a glacier calves an iceberg it often causes a tsunami, but the source is usually so far away from land there is no impact. One could argue that sometimes that is a result of global warming, or raised mean temperature due to climate change

Whoever first said that every day's a schoolday was talking pish, but I never knew till now that glaciers were female. :agree:

[JeMeSouviens]

Although when a glacier calves an iceberg it often causes a tsunami, but the source is usually so far away from land there is no impact. One could argue that sometimes that is a result of global warming, or raised mean temperature due to climate change

Is the obvious effect not just that with sea level raised low lying coastal areas are more vulnerable?

[Moulin Yarns]

Is the obvious effect not just that with sea level raised low lying coastal areas are more vulnerable?

Yes, but I was answering a point about tsunamis.

A wee tip, don't move to live in The Maldives, average height above sea level is 1.2m and the highest point is double that. Think about it, the ceiling of a modern house is the same height as the Maldives.

[JeMeSouviens]

Yes, but I was answering a point about tsunamis.

Yeah, I know, I meant low level coastal areas are more vulnerable to tsunamis, ie. for the same size of earthquake the tsunami will be more damaging for a recent one than one when sea levels were lower.


A wee tip, don't move to live in The Maldives, average height above sea level is 1.2m and the highest point is double that. Think about it, the ceiling of a modern house is the same height as the Maldives.

I live 200m asl and I'm staying put! :greengrin

[hibsbollah]

Yes, but I was answering a point about tsunamis.

A wee tip, don't move to live in The Maldives, average height above sea level is 1.2m and the highest point is double that. Think about it, the ceiling of a modern house is the same height as the Maldives.

Similarly large parts of Miami (not a cheap part of the world for land values) will likely be underwater in 60? years, hence the insurance industry's growing nervousness and Mark Carney's 'existential threat' speech.

[Moulin Yarns]

Yeah, I know, I meant low level coastal areas are more vulnerable to tsunamis, ie. for the same size of earthquake the tsunami will be more damaging for a recent one than one when sea levels were lower.



I live 200m asl and I'm staying put! :greengrin

Same height as me. The only way is up. 😁 Getting up the hill on the bicycle is a killer 😉

[RyeSloan]

84% rise for Beyond Meat on IPO debut today...now valued at $2.4bn!

[JeMeSouviens]

84% rise for Beyond Meat on IPO debut today...now valued at $2.4bn!

Wow, it's the dotcom bubble all over again. How much did you make? :wink:

[One Day Soon]

That was essentially part of my point.

We are importing mountains of food from the Netherlands throughout the winter because there is obviously demand for it.

There are 2 options. Either educate people about seasonality and try to put the genie back in the bottle or develop our own farming practices to meet demand. Growing your own food is sustainable whether that incorporates traditional seasonality or otherwise. Flying or shipping food from Chile, Morocco, Israel and The Netherlands throughout the winter simply isn't.


I think you're right - a loss of some basic skills in both growing your own food and what to cook and when makes a big difference. Put that together with what is plentiful in Scotland but which we are by and large bad at eating despite our relatively poor diet - seafood, berries and oats in particular - and we are in an odd but definitely changeable situation.

Our agricultural practices could make a big difference to what is available and when, our own individual capacities to 'grow our own' could make a big dent too if everyone did what they can (and it would help if Councils took allotment provision much more seriously) and if we all started to using freezers for managing batch cooking with what is seasonably available rather than storing processed food we'd develop a different outlook too.

I think our biggest challenge in this is how time poor we have become, particularly in the last decade or so. Too busy running fast to try to survive to be able to stop and work out how to live. But that's another thread.

[One Day Soon]

Same height as me. The only way is up. 😁 Getting up the hill on the bicycle is a killer 😉

I'm only 113 metres, I guess I'll be living on a raft Waterworld stylee well before you guys. :hmmm:

[Moulin Yarns]

I'm only 113 metres, I guess I'll be living on a raft Waterworld stylee well before you guys. :hmmm:

Sorry, altitude of 200m rather than Peter Crouch 😉

[One Day Soon]

Sorry, altitude of 200m rather than Peter Crouch 😉


I just checked and Easter Road is only 35 metres above sea level...

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm only 113 metres, I guess I'll be living on a raft Waterworld stylee well before you guys. :hmmm:

Good luck with the supervolcano! :bye:

[One Day Soon]

Good luck with the supervolcano! :bye:

I'm coming to join you at your place :greengrin

[JeMeSouviens]

I'm coming to join you at your place :greengrin

All will be welcome in the Independent People's Republic of Pentlandia.

[easty]

I just checked and Easter Road is only 35 metres above sea level...

time to fill in the corners, and make it watertight then

[Just Alf]

time to fill in the corners, and make it watertight then

Gorgie's 50 odd metres.... we'd have to ground share!!!! :grr:

[Moulin Yarns]

Gorgie's 50 odd metres.... we'd have to ground share!!!! :grr:

Water of Leith will burst it's banks and cause postponements. :wink:

[RyeSloan]

Wow, it's the dotcom bubble all over again. How much did you make? :wink:

Ha ha I wish!

And as you pointed out their products look expensive and a market cap of $2.4bn on sales of under $100m didn’t quite pass my sanity filter...

Still that’s coming from the man who never bought amazon in the early 2000’s due to its propensity not to make any profit so WTFDIK? [emoji23]

[Moulin Yarns]

How do we want to tackle climate change?

If anyone has any ideas how about posting on here.

One thing I want to see is every new building to have solar panels as a planning policy.

Wind turbines along the central reservations of motorways and dual carriageways.

Any more ideas?

[RyeSloan]

How do we want to tackle climate change?

If anyone has any ideas how about posting on here.

One thing I want to see is every new building to have solar panels as a planning policy.

Wind turbines along the central reservations of motorways and dual carriageways.

Any more ideas?

Not sure about the turbines idea! What’s the rationale behind that...apart from making it damn hard to install and service them?

And not to mention the small matter somewhat disconcerting to drive along the road with huge blades swishing away above your head mile after mile [emoji23]

[Slavers]

I think a lot of climate change is down to the way the earth orbits round the sun rather than anything else.

[Moulin Yarns]

Not sure about the turbines idea! What’s the rationale behind that...apart from making it damn hard to install and service them?

And not to mention the small matter somewhat disconcerting to drive along the road with huge blades swishing away above your head mile after mile [emoji23]

Thankfully not all turbines are huge propellers

https://www.shell.com/inside-energy/turbine-turns-traffic-into-energy.html




https://www.energylivenews.com/2018/10/15/new-wind-turbine-tech-gets-revved-up-by-passing-vehicles/

[Moulin Yarns]

I think a lot of climate change is down to the way the earth orbits round the sun rather than anything else.

I accept that historic ice ages were likely to be attributed to the the fluctuations of the earth orbit around the sun, but the evidence all points to the current rise in average temperature and increased frequency of weather events being man made.

[Just Alf]

I think a lot of climate change is down to the way the earth orbits round the sun rather than anything else.This is 100% correct, though the change is gradual over 1000 years or so.
Its this type of fact that climate deniers often use to 'prove' that the current shifts aren't caused by humanity, this is despite specific scientific data mapped to increasing industrial output across the world over the last 100 years or so that shows different.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Just Alf]

Just add to my post, I read years ago that we should actually be just starting on the 1000 year journey towards the next ice age.

Maybe if we're still around at that point things will balance out!

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

This is 100% correct, though the change is gradual over 1000 years or so.
Its this type of fact that climate deniers often use to 'prove' that the current shifts aren't caused by humanity, this is despite specific scientific data mapped to increasing industrial output across the world over the last 100 years or so that shows different.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

Historic ice ages occurred between 70,000 and 100,000 years apart, due to the earth orbit wobble and ellipse

There's been about 7 ice ages in 650,000 years, the last about 7,000 years ago.

[Just Alf]

Historic ice ages occurred between 70,000 and 100,000 years apart, due to the earth orbit wobble and ellipse

There's been about 7 ice ages in 650,000 years, the last about 7,000 years ago.Maybe I'm getting my 7000 and 70000's mixed up in my memory, I take back my statement that global warming could be balanced out in a 1000 years or so, I'm many 1000's of years out!

Back to the OP, really good insulation to one one hand, keep the heat in during the winter and on the other to keep the heat out in summer.

Sent from my SM-G935F using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

As battery powered cars are now a reality then massive investment in the infrastructure needed for charging them along with legislation that means all new cars should only be electric should be a no brainer.
All new house construction should be to passiv house standard. Massive investment in insulation in current housing stock. Tax gas heating to pay for it.
Plant lots and lots of trees. Scotland has plenty of space for new forests.
Award no new licenses for oil exploration in the North Sea.
All achievable. All the tech available now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Moulin Yarns]

As battery powered cars are now a reality then massive investment in the infrastructure needed for charging them along with legislation that means all new cars should only be electric should be a no brainer.
All new house construction should be to passiv house standard. Massive investment in insulation in current housing stock. Tax gas heating to pay for it.
Plant lots and lots of trees. Scotland has plenty of space for new forests.
Award no new licenses for oil exploration in the North Sea.
All achievable. All the tech available now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On tree planting, none should be on areas of deep peat as the peat is already a carbon sink.

[Moulin Yarns]

As battery powered cars are now a reality then massive investment in the infrastructure needed for charging them along with legislation that means all new cars should only be electric should be a no brainer.
All new house construction should be to passiv house standard. Massive investment in insulation in current housing stock. Tax gas heating to pay for it.
Plant lots and lots of trees. Scotland has plenty of space for new forests.
Award no new licenses for oil exploration in the North Sea.
All achievable. All the tech available now.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

On the charging points, every supermarket and retail park should have lots of them. I was at IKEA last week and there were none as far as I could see.

[danhibees1875]

How do we want to tackle climate change?

If anyone has any ideas how about posting on here.

One thing I want to see is every new building to have solar panels as a planning policy.

Wind turbines along the central reservations of motorways and dual carriageways.

Any more ideas?

I think the solar panels one is already a thing. Sites that gained permission after a certain year (2017 I think) have to include them.

[jonty]

The UK Govt removing the feed-in-tariffs hasn't helped adoption of solar panels.
Is there sufficient efficiency in them yet to benefit deployment in Scotland? I wouldn't be surprised if we'd benefit more from domestic wind turbines (we seem to live in a wind tunnel)

[Moulin Yarns]

I think the solar panels one is already a thing. Sites that gained permission after a certain year (2017 I think) have to include them.

I think that's only domestic property, offices, commercial development, industrial units don't, and that's where a big difference could be made.

District heating schemes are normal on the continent but we are only getting going on them.

[Moulin Yarns]

The UK Govt removing the feed-in-tariffs hasn't helped adoption of solar panels.
Is there sufficient efficiency in them yet to benefit deployment in Scotland? I wouldn't be surprised if we'd benefit more from domestic wind turbines (we seem to live in a wind tunnel)

Solar panels don't need sunny days, just daylight. But why not both?

[jonty]

Solar panels don't need sunny days, just daylight. But why not both?
I'd also like some stonking batteries to hold the surplus.

Tesla seems like a good idea (roof tiles and battery) but always seem to be just around the corner.
This time next year I hope to be in a position to have something installed. I just don't know what.

[Moulin Yarns]

I'd also like some stonking batteries to hold the surplus.

Tesla seems like a good idea (roof tiles and battery) but always seem to be just around the corner.
This time next year I hope to be in a position to have something installed. I just don't know what.

Well worth a look at this and get a better idea of what you can do.

https://www.energysavingtrust.org.uk/scotland

[Moulin Yarns]

Solar farms are being built now. Even up here in perthshire, and battery storage is included so the power can be released when needed.

[stoneyburn hibs]

Solar farms.

[stoneyburn hibs]

Sorry I never read the previous posts.

[RyeSloan]

Solar farms are being built now. Even up here in perthshire, and battery storage is included so the power can be released when needed.

I wasn’t aware the Errol site had storage, nor does the one planned for Moray.

They are tiny though in terms of power 20-50mw. Peterhead gas for example is something like 1,500mw and Torness 1,200mw

Still renewables is all about multiple sites and Scotland is already a net exporter of electricity so no reason for these types of sites not to keep adding to the mix.

[Moulin Yarns]

I wasn’t aware the Errol site had storage, nor does the one planned for Moray.

They are tiny though in terms of power 20-50mw. Peterhead gas for example is something like 1,500mw and Torness 1,200mw

Still renewables is all about multiple sites and Scotland is already a net exporter of electricity so no reason for these types of sites not to keep adding to the mix.

Erroll doesn't but the Abernethy one will /does.

[RyeSloan]

Erroll doesn't but the Abernethy one will /does.

Thanks. My google skills are clearly lacking as I can’t find details on that...any links or info on what type of battery is being used?

[Moulin Yarns]

Thanks. My google skills are clearly lacking as I can’t find details on that...any links or info on what type of battery is being used?

I'll look in the morning.

James field farm

[lapsedhibee]

On tree planting, none should be on areas of deep peat as the peat is already a carbon sink.

Any idea how many average trees the average late 20th century home would have to have on site to be carbon neutral? I'm guessing very many, but would be interested to know whether local tree planting, in addition to reforestation elsewhere, could be of any significance.

[danhibees1875]

I think that's only domestic property, offices, commercial development, industrial units don't, and that's where a big difference could be made.

District heating schemes are normal on the continent but we are only getting going on them.

I think you're right in terms of it being for domestic and spot on about needing it to be on commercial development too. :agree:



As for the storage point, I believe that to be the main stumbling block at the moment for renewable energy and will be the next big step the industry can make. Finding the most efficient way to store energy.

Quite often you can go past turbines and there will be some not moving, safe from them being faulty it's because the farm is generating too much power for the grid which can't all be used. Once we can safely and efficiently store all the excess for another time we'll be in a much better place with our energy mix.

I was sure I read that Scotland managed a day fully powered by renewables last year, but I can't find the article anywhere. :dunno:

[Moulin Yarns]

I wasn’t aware the Errol site had storage, nor does the one planned for Moray.

They are tiny though in terms of power 20-50mw. Peterhead gas for example is something like 1,500mw and Torness 1,200mw

Still renewables is all about multiple sites and Scotland is already a net exporter of electricity so no reason for these types of sites not to keep adding to the mix.

Jamesfield will have 2 storage facilities 30mW and 19mW of storage, and they will be Tesla batteries. At least it's a step in the right direction.

[Moulin Yarns]

Any idea how many average trees the average late 20th century home would have to have on site to be carbon neutral? I'm guessing very many, but would be interested to know whether local tree planting, in addition to reforestation elsewhere, could be of any significance.

I don't know but I am watching the Scotland from the sky and they have just flown over ravenscraig and natural regeneration has made the steelwork a birch woodland.

My garden is 1/4 acres and there was an old plum and cherry tree when I moved here, last year I coppiced 5 trees for my stoves and will do the same this year, 5 to 7 years cycle of coppicing and I have fuel and the trees continue to grow.

[Moulin Yarns]

Here is a Frightening fact, the wind farm on Eaglesham Moor, whitelee has the same footprint as Aberdeen!

[Ozyhibby]

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/05/its-capitalism-not-socialism-that-will-beat-climate-change/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Decent article that mentions Beyond Meat which was mentioned earlier in the thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Ozyhibby]

https://www.scotsman.com/news/transport/cars-as-new-as-five-years-old-could-be-banned-in-edinburgh-1-4921317/amp?__twitter_impression=true

Good idea.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

[Glory Lurker]

Here is a Frightening fact, the wind farm on Eaglesham Moor, whitelee has the same footprint as Aberdeen!

The print of fit fit, though?

[Smartie]

https://blogs.spectator.co.uk/2019/05/its-capitalism-not-socialism-that-will-beat-climate-change/amp/?__twitter_impression=true

Decent article that mentions Beyond Meat which was mentioned earlier in the thread.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

It also tackles the socialism vs capitalism argument that was taking place.

I'm going to declare myself on the fence on that one. Capitalism will be what makes us win the battle but it cannot be done without government policy and intervention. If the markets are left all alone then carnage (eventually) happens. You can see the real forces of capitalism at play with the climate change deniers in the USA.

Socialism alone would never manage it either though.

I always find the socialism vs capitalism debate quite interesting. In all honesty we need a mixed economy at all times, some socialism and some capitalism and depending on where we happen to be at any particular moment we can swing back and forth between whether or not we need more of one or the other.

Interesting article, and one you could probably re-write word word word with the title "climate change will never be beaten without government intervention and policy".

[Ozyhibby]

It also tackles the socialism vs capitalism argument that was taking place.

I'm going to declare myself on the fence on that one. Capitalism will be what makes us win the battle but it cannot be done without government policy and intervention. If the markets are left all alone then carnage (eventually) happens. You can see the real forces of capitalism at play with the climate change deniers in the USA.

Socialism alone would never manage it either though.

I always find the socialism vs capitalism debate quite interesting. In all honesty we need a mixed economy at all times, some socialism and some capitalism and depending on where we happen to be at any particular moment we can swing back and forth between whether or not we need more of one or the other.

Interesting article, and one you could probably re-write word word word with the title "climate change will never be beaten without government intervention and policy".

I think the article agrees with you. Govt needs to set out the targets we want to achieve and allow capitalism to provide the solutions.
i.e. start charging for releasing carbon and let the market then find ways of avoiding that cost.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk