Energy, the environment & climate change.

China emits the most followed by the USA and then India followed by Russia and they account for a large proportion of the C02 that is trapped in the Earths atmosphere which without we only find some bacteria and AI surviving as we (humans ) would freeze to death quickly.

Its interesting that CH4 a much more potent gas than CO2 with a much higher CWC albeit its CWC diminishes quicker over time is rarely mentioned in the conversation.

it is estimated that CH4 contributed around 25 per cent to global warming if I can use that term in 2018.

of course water vapour is by far the most abundant greenhouse gas produced that rises into the ether as such.

Countries are taking action both at a local government , corporate and citizen level to reduce their carbon footprints.

I have significantly reduced mine in the past twenty years as have many of if not all of you.

Humans will adapt to changes in climate as they have over the time they have spent on this planet in various guises pre and post the industrial revolution.

Science tells us there have been times and many of them when the average temperature has been higher than it has been in recent years while human beings in there many guises inhabited the planet.

What we do with human starvation , population growth , food security , pandemics , extreme weather events , bushfires , pollution , destruction of plant and animal life , deforestation to name but a few in a carbon neutral world are age long issues that will be with us whether the average temperature is 2 or 4 degrees on average higher than it is now or not.

Some want to see quicker " action " whatever that action contains and means and who and what it impacts on positively and negatively and look to government for all the answers like they have in the pandemic and this ideology is flawed in some respects as history tell us.

Do your bit reduce your carbon footprint in any small way if you wish to but don't admonish those who you think are not it will not achieve the outcome you desire.
 
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.
Absolutely this. We can mainly focus on G20 states here.

Before writing a book on here I'll just chip in some ideas/concepts anyone is free to follow or not:

- Planetary bounderies -> Donut economy (Kate Raworth). Great concept, integrating ALL problems instead of ignoring what we don't want to see only to avoid any change, for egoist reasons.

- Individual ecological/carbon footprint. It's about global justice.

Scientists have delivered all we need to know. We don't have a deficit of facts, but of action.

All discussions should instantly move away from language and shift towards numbers. We are talking too much with no outcome.
We have to talk numbers and facts and make simple calculations and the logical outcome would be quite clear.

And when we think about WHY we are driving nature into the quickest mass extinction EVER we will find video games, football, cars, shopping and porn (to be edited). "Homo sapiens"...
 
China emits the most followed by the USA and then India followed by Russia and they account for a large proportion of the C02 that is trapped in the Earths atmosphere which without we only find some bacteria and AI surviving as we (humans ) would freeze to death quickly.

Its interesting that CH4 a much more potent gas than CO2 with a much higher CWC albeit its CWC diminishes quicker over time is rarely mentioned in the conversation.

it is estimated that CH4 contributed around 25 per cent to global warming if I can use that term in 2018.

of course water vapour is by far the most abundant greenhouse gas produced that rises into the ether as such.

Countries are taking action both at a local government , corporate and citizen level to reduce their carbon footprints.

I have significantly reduced mine in the past twenty years as have many of if not all of you.

Humans will adapt to changes in climate as they have over the time they have spent on this planet in various guises pre and post the industrial revolution.

Science tells us there have been times and many of them when the average temperature has been higher than it has been in recent years while human beings in there many guises inhabited the planet.

What we do with human starvation , population growth , food security , pandemics , extreme weather events , bushfires , pollution , destruction of plant and animal life , deforestation to name but a few in a carbon neutral world are age long issues that will be with us whether the average temperature is 2 or 4 degrees on average higher than it is now or not.

Some want to see quicker " action " whatever that action contains and means and who and what it impacts on positively and negatively and look to government for all the answers like they have in the pandemic and this ideology is flawed in some respects as history tell us.

Do your bit reduce your carbon footprint in any small way if you wish to but don't admonish those who you think are not it will not achieve the outcome you desire.
You only have to look at what happened to the average diurnal temperature after 9-11 when aircraft stopped dumping massive amounts of water vapour into the atmosphere for a few days or so.
 
I’ve got a masters degree in Renewable Energy Engineering. There are so many obstacles in place preventing the government achieving this net zero goal they have its ridiculous. Technical, financial, behavioural and having enough ppl to actually do all the work.
Am I correct in thinking that wind turbines don't become carbon neutral until they are getting towards there end of life, and that if you factor in the environmental cost of scrapping/recycling them they are actually never carbon neutral, or is that just a myth peddled by the fossil fuel industries?
 
Am I correct in thinking that wind turbines don't become carbon neutral until they are getting towards there end of life, and that if you factor in the environmental cost of scrapping/recycling them they are actually never carbon neutral, or is that just a myth peddled by the fossil fuel industries?
It's a myth that wind turbines don't reduce carbon emissions | Chris Goodall and Mark Lynas | Environment | The Guardian

Wind Energy's Carbon Footprint - FactCheck.org

It's a huge myth and one that is peddled by people with strong financial interests within the Gas/Oil industries.
 

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.