Energy, the environment & climate change.

BlueHammer85 said:
just don't see how we can prevent environmental issues when the world population is growing at such an alarming rate

50 years ago , world population was 3.7 billion

right now it is 7.6 billion!
Click to expand...
If we're speaking solely about CO2 emissions, western lifestyles are to blame. You have countries like Bangladesh with a population of 163m who produce around 84.5 MT CO2 per year. Compared to the UK with a population of 68 million who produce 379 MT CO2 per year.

It's easy for us to look at countries with huge populations and point the finger, but we only have ourselves in the west to blame. The average Brit produces 10x more CO2 than the average Bangladeshi person. The usual comeback to that point is 'well I don't want to live like an average person from a poor Asian nation', which sums up just how selfish we are, as it's those in the poorer nations that will suffer from climate change.
 
es1 said:
seems risky to gamble being able to solve these issues on technology that we dont know will exist or if it will, when and if it'll be any good!
Click to expand...
Sure, and I am not proposing we do. We should be cautious and take action, as we are doing. I am merely making the observation that whatever predicament we find ourselves in, in 100 years, the technology then available to make changes will inevitably be a whole load better than what we have now.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Sure, and I am not proposing we do. We should be cautious and take action, as we are doing. I am merely making the observation that whatever predicament we find ourselves in, in 100 years, the technology then available to make changes will inevitably be a whole load better than what we have now.
Click to expand...

fair enough. personally i dont think we're doing anywhere near enough to tackle climate change, plastic and air pollution, deforestation, overpopulation etc at all. there's plenty we could do but no appetite from governemnts (they want to stay in power) and people (they want to maintain their lifestyle) to do it
 
Chippy_boy said:
I think we will see some of these effects, I agree. Semantics perhaps but I don't think that this is a catastrophe however, and even if it is, I don't think it's reasonable to pin it all on climate change. Famine in Africa for example is something we as mankind have had the ability to fix for decades and yet relatively speaking have done fuck all about it. If we do see increased famine in Africa, then it's also as a result of our inaction when action to prevent it is absolutely possible.

And I don't know what is disingenuous about suggesting that 2100 to 2200 technology will inevitably be unimaginable compared to what we have today. That's just a statement of fact, is it not?
Click to expand...
I think your point about technology in 100 years time is fair, but it's still a gamble. The technology might be 500 years out, we don't know - so it's better to change our ways now and reduce the workload for our descendants.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Sure, and I am not proposing we do. We should be cautious and take action, as we are doing. I am merely making the observation that whatever predicament we find ourselves in, in 100 years, the technology then available to make changes will inevitably be a whole load better than what we have now.
Click to expand...
Haha, Jesus wept.
 
Chippy_boy said:
Sure, and I am not proposing we do. We should be cautious and take action, as we are doing. I am merely making the observation that whatever predicament we find ourselves in, in 100 years, the technology then available to make changes will inevitably be a whole load better than what we have now.
Click to expand...
It will take decades to make a meaningful difference to the CO2 in the atmosphere and the plastics in the ocean whatever tech is available which is why there is an almost unanimous consensus amongst experts that we need to act now to even have a chance of avoiding the worst outcomes. Many people have spent the last few years giving equivalent credence to people who haven't a clue rather than listening to people who have the education, knowledge and experience to have a pretty good idea of what actually needs to be done.
 
Manchester33 said:
If we're speaking solely about CO2 emissions, western lifestyles are to blame. You have countries like Bangladesh with a population of 163m who produce around 84.5 MT CO2 per year. Compared to the UK with a population of 68 million who produce 379 MT CO2 per year.

It's easy for us to look at countries with huge populations and point the finger, but we only have ourselves in the west to blame. The average Brit produces 10x more CO2 than the average Bangladeshi person. The usual comeback to that point is 'well I don't want to live like an average person from a poor Asian nation', which sums up just how selfish we are, as it's those in the poorer nations that will suffer from climate change.
Click to expand...
I agree about the double-standards, but honestly it's completely unrealistic to suggest we change our lifestyles to those of Bangladesh isn't it. But at the same time, it's a bit rich us saying "we've fucked up the planet with our rampant and uncontrolled industrialisation, so you cannot now do the same or it will further damage the planet". It's also a bit rich claiming carbon reduction when in fact we just increased ours some more and paid someone else to reduce theirs (i.e. carbon trading schemes).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Unread Posts

Don't have an account? Register now and see fewer ads!

SIGN UP
Back
Top
✖
  AdBlock Detected
Bluemoon relies on advertising to pay our hosting fees. Please support the site by disabling your ad blocking software to help keep the forum sustainable. Thanks.