Going Green to save Planet Earth

[Nihilist]

I think there are bigger issues. In 1920 the world population was close to 2 billion, just 100 years later it's close to 8 billion. Scientists have estimated that Earth resources could be enough for 9-10 billion people. We are going to get close to that number in the not too distant future , and then go past it.

 

[Mad Eyed Screamer]

I think there are bigger issues. In 1920 the world population was close to 2 billion, just 100 years later it's close to 8 billion. Scientists have estimated that Earth resources could be enough for 9-10 billion people. We are going to get close to that number in the not too distant future , and then go past it.

So if we simply exterminated all the rags in the world it will give the earth an extra few decades....

 

[idahoblues]

I thought you liked riding moose's more?

He’ll ride anything with four legs

 

[Metal Biker]

So if we simply exterminated all the rags in the world it will give the earth an extra few decades....

Too risky, need to throw in the Dippers too. Just to cover all bases.

 

[Well Wisher]

With all the news on climate armageddon and OAPS using super glue to stick themselves to roads I thought I need to change my behaviour.....ditch my diesel car.....go green.....do my bit.......so, me and family off for a week in Whitby, I priced up the train cost for 2 adults and child return from Chorley.....it cost £500 standard train fare and took 5 hrs+ !!! ..... we have no chance really do we until it costs billions with flooding and major weather events..... nothing will change from COP26....blah blah blah - anyone think we can avoid this?

I go to Whitby a few times a year. Costs nothing by bike fyi.

 

[tregyblue61]

Just a little hint - don't use shampoo. I haven't used shampoo for years. There have been plenty of programmes about it. In the shower just go through the motions of washing your hair without the shampoo. People say yeh but...your hair gets greasy without. Your hair gets greasy because you keep shampooing the natural oils your hair produces out of your hair and it combats this by producing more oil. After a while with no shampoo your hair will be fine.

If you must use shampoo there are plenty of soap bars for shampooing.

Soap bars do all your body and are a brilliant choice: very little packaging to recycle. Good for the environment if you choose the plant-based bar and, most importantly, are made in the UK so you'll be supporting British business too!

PS: They call me the Womble at work as I like to re-use and recycle everything.

 

[Barcon]

I thought you liked riding moose's more?

Obviously.

 

[liveandletdive]

I feel left out not living in Chorley

There's always room for one more blue..

 

[mancity1]

I think there are bigger issues. In 1920 the world population was close to 2 billion, just 100 years later it's close to 8 billion. Scientists have estimated that Earth resources could be enough for 9-10 billion people. We are going to get close to that number in the not too distant future , and then go past it.

interestingly there is a link between the warming of the planet and the greening of the planet and the fact that the greener the planet the more food available as the sugars needed for human life become more abundant.

There is a lot more to it than that of course and not all green plant is good for the environment and human land us and cropping also means more food as well which quickly realise CO2 back into the atmosphere.

A question of balance I suggest but it is generally true that the warmer the planet the better conditions for food production but many would argue if it gets too warm there are other repercussions.

Still a lot to research and understand about the correlation and otherwise regarding food production and its impact on the climate.

my view is there are bigger issues for humanity to address than climate change as an issue on its own and mans impact on the temperature on the planet in order to survive and prosper.

if emissions can be effectively reduced without massive cost to the poor namely through private investment and a relatively seamless transition of work and type of work with less regulation and and less government directive to the citizen then its worth pursuing.

Reducing emissions from man made activity is a worthy endeavour to pursue.

Emission reduction as an end to itself without a proper debate on the impact on the environment , food production , taxes , subsidies , land use , farming , energy generation and work and more importantly on terrestrial beings to name but a few may not prove fruitful when all is said and done.

We must never forget terrestrial life is based on carbon and co2 and we cannot change that.

 

[inchy14]

I think there are bigger issues. In 1920 the world population was close to 2 billion, just 100 years later it's close to 8 billion. Scientists have estimated that Earth resources could be enough for 9-10 billion people. We are going to get close to that number in the not too distant future , and then go past it.

No we’re not, people especially in the west are having less children now, families are 1 or 2 kids, this will mean that it can’t continue to grow, it’ll plateau and then begin to decrease.
There’s a documentary about it somewhere explaining it better than I just have but I’m too fucked to find it.