Almost completely caused by humans

Lost Seasider said:
Your answers boil down to either:
  1. we all need to be better people;
  2. genocide.
I hope it is obvious why both are problematic, and saying "it's a high level answer doesn't change that".




AKA genocide.




Buzz words, not practical advice.




None of it means anything either.




And we're back to either genocide, or waffle about being better people, or both.
Click to expand...

I’m not being funny lost, but you’re behaving like a tit. I’m briefly answering a broad question on a forum, not writing an instruction manual on the specifics.

You and your blog writing ‘anti-environmentalist’ are seeking to over-complicate the issue in order to justify individual inaction and shift responsibility.

It’s obvious to anyone for example that walking home from school is better for the environment than being individually collected in a 4x4 or that making the set of the clothes you have is better than continually buying new ones so you can “look nice”. That drying clothes on the washing line, hand washing dishes, taking care and maintaining existing household items, riding your bike to the shops, switching electrical items off, eliminating mastic consumption, properly managing food waste etc.

You refer to my comments as “buzzwords”, yet they are descriptive terms that are simple to understand and have obvious meaning.

Reversing population growth does not amount to genocide. To suggest it does is just being ridiculous for the sake of it. It’s a matter of individual responsibility.

And it’s not about becoming “better people” either (whatever that means). It’s a case of acknowledging that we all have a role to play , to reconnecting with what we are and implementing practical measures to reduce our impact on our planet.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
I’m not being funny lost, but you’re behaving like a tit. I’m briefly answering a broad question on a forum, not writing an instruction manual on the specifics.

You and your blog writing ‘anti-environmentalist’ are seeking to over-complicate the issue in order to justify individual inaction and shift responsibility.

It’s obvious to anyone for example that walking home from school is better for the environment than being individually collected in a 4x4 or that making the set of the clothes you have is better than continually buying new ones so you can “look nice”. That drying clothes on the washing line, hand washing dishes, taking care and maintaining existing household items, riding your bike to the shops, switching electrical items off, eliminating mastic consumption, properly managing food waste etc.

You refer to my comments as “buzzwords”, yet they are descriptive terms that are simple to understand and have obvious meaning.

Reversing population growth does not amount to genocide. To suggest it does is just being ridiculous for the sake of it. It’s a matter of individual responsibility.

And it’s not about becoming “better people” either (whatever that means). It’s a case of acknowledging that we all have a role to play , to reconnecting with what we are and implementing practical measures to reduce our impact on our planet.
Click to expand...
That is an excellent post.
 
Last edited:
Lala said:
It has to start with education.

For many households this is, and has always been, a fleeting headline in the news that not much real attention is paid to. Some households won’t even ever watch the news.
We need to somehow target at household level explaining what will help and what makes things worse and what the consequences will mean.
There maybe some intelligence on this board relating to the subject matter but there will be hundreds of thousands of households who won’t have a bloody clue.
Click to expand...
Households could have a massive impact on their own. Our old energetically inefficient housing stock wastes vast amounts of energy and money for its inhabitants. A real, properly funded and managed insulation campaign would help the Government achieve its targets, just don't mention the disastrous Green Deal which is currently costing some of its participants £££££s
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
You asked a question, I answered it…then you say the answer is meaningless waffle?

It’s a high level answer….

We need to control and reverse population growth.

We need to curtail our consumption and completely move away from the consumer based economy.

We need to stop being wasteful and control, conserve, recycle and re-use.

None of it is rocket science….

And to be frank with you in my experience the rocket science is completely pointless without first dealing with the human problem.
Click to expand...
The individual, the industry, the business and the State all have parts to play. Individuals would help the environment by hugely reducing their consumption of red meat ( and fish, to preserve stocks). The State needs to take leadership in adjusting the macro-economic model away from a push for growth. Economic growth equals an ever increasing exploitation of scarce and finite resources. Businesses need to 'green' their consumption of resources, where feasible and industrial processes must, where feasible, move away from carbon-based fuels.
All new build domestic properties should be equipped with solar panels: it's the C21st version of providing water and gas plumbing. Nationally, Governments should be committed to the growth of solar, wind and tidal-based electricity generation, whilst looking to extend nuclear generation.
 
AVFTT - where the greatest brains in the world come together to solve the problems of the universe. Laughably, it's only in their own minds that they think they possess so much knowledge. BFC3 rhe most arrogant condescending of them all. An absolute bellend.
 
20togo said:
AVFTT - where the greatest brains in the world come together to solve the problems of the universe. Laughably, it's only in their own minds that they think they possess so much knowledge. BFC3 rhe most arrogant condescending of them all. An absolute bellend.
Click to expand...
I think you must have your own problems. It's largely been a good thread, with occasional blips, but X3 has made an excellent contribution. Absolutely no condescension or arrogance involved. Me and X3 have had our difficult moments but I'm absolutely prepared to recognise a top contribution when I see one.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
I think you must have your own problems. It's largely been a good thread, with occasional blips, but X3 has made an excellent contribution. Absolutely no condescension or arrogance involved. Me and X3 have had our difficult moments but I'm absolutely prepared to recognise a top contribution when I see one.
Click to expand...
no problems at all. Think it's most of you lot that have.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
The individual, the industry, the business and the State all have parts to play. Individuals would help the environment by hugely reducing their consumption of red meat ( and fish, to preserve stocks). The State needs to take leadership in adjusting the macro-economic model away from a push for growth. Economic growth equals an ever increasing exploitation of scarce and finite resources. Businesses need to 'green' their consumption of resources, where feasible and industrial processes must, where feasible, move away from carbon-based fuels.
All new build domestic properties should be equipped with solar panels: it's the C21st version of providing water and gas plumbing. Nationally, Governments should be committed to the growth of solar, wind and tidal-based electricity generation, whilst looking to extend nuclear generation.
Click to expand...
Not so much as limiting eating fish '66 but as an individual choosing a more varied selection to consume instead of the base favourites, and on an industrial scale getting rid of those monster seagoing factories and using less damaging methods. Everything else I agree with.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
It’s obvious to anyone for example that walking home from school is better for the environment than being individually collected in a 4x4 or that making the set of the clothes you have is better than continually buying new ones so you can “look nice”. That drying clothes on the washing line, hand washing dishes, taking care and maintaining existing household items, riding your bike to the shops, switching electrical items off, eliminating mastic consumption, properly managing food waste etc.
Click to expand...

What's your best guess at the effect that could be achieved if all of those measures could be implemented to the maximum realistic extent?

I'd guess about 0.1% of annual UK co2 emissions or delaying climate change by about 1 day at best.


BFC_BFC_BFC said:
You and your blog writing ‘anti-environmentalist’ are seeking to over-complicate the issue in order to justify individual inaction and shift responsibility.
Click to expand...

That link was actually an extract from this book: Tim Harford - Adapt

He's a BBC R4 presenter and hardly what I'd describe as an anti-environmentalist, it's chapter 5 if you're interested and he goes on to talk at length about the problems with identifying environmental savings and how attempts to enforce them can frequently be counterproductive, something that you might find helpful to understand.


BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Reversing population growth does not amount to genocide. To suggest it does is just being ridiculous for the sake of it. It’s a matter of individual responsibility.
Click to expand...

Well frankly I've no idea how individual responsibility is have any kind of material effect on the planet's population, and if you can think of any other word to describe the enforced elimiation of 3bn - 5bn people I'd be glad to hear it.
 
EagleDay said:
Not so much as limiting eating fish '66 but as an individual choosing a more varied selection to consume instead of the base favourites, and on an industrial scale getting rid of those monster seagoing factories and using less damaging methods. Everything else I agree with.
Click to expand...
Ah yes, the Russian fish factories.zUnfortunately, I'm guilty. I like all fish but me and wife do like to grill haddock covered in butter and breadcrumbs. Yes, we should move on to other white fish: don't think much of Bass, wife doesn't like the flatfish, Halibut is too expensive. But no, you're right.
 
Lost Seasider said:
What's your best guess at the effect that could be achieved if all of those measures could be implemented to the maximum realistic extent?

I'd guess about 0.1% of annual UK co2 emissions or delaying climate change by about 1 day at best.




That link was actually an extract from this book: Tim Harford - Adapt

He's a BBC R4 presenter and hardly what I'd describe as an anti-environmentalist, it's chapter 5 if you're interested and he goes on to talk at length about the problems with identifying environmental savings and how attempts to enforce them can frequently be counterproductive, something that you might find helpful to understand.




Well frankly I've no idea how individual responsibility is have any kind of material effect on the planet's population, and if you can think of any other word to describe the enforced elimiation of 3bn - 5bn people I'd be glad to hear it.
Click to expand...
Lost, I'll try one last time. I said in my OP, that it requires the huge polluters to do their bit. I've also said that individuals should do their bit. I've also said that all plauers- individuals, States, businesses and industries- have to all do something. Please don't use your dismissal of individualist efforts in order to dismiss the World's needs to address climate change.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Well frankly I've no idea how individual responsibility is have any kind of material effect on the planet's population, and if you can think of any other word to describe the enforced elimiation of 3bn - 5bn people I'd be glad to hear it.
Click to expand...
If enough people take individual responsibility, the cumulative impact is very significant. It's a bit like..... oh, staging a boycott of a football club.

If you think reversing population growth is the same as genocide, I think the issue is your comprehension, to be honest. They are clearly different things.
 
20togo said:
AVFTT - where the greatest brains in the world come together to solve the problems of the universe. Laughably, it's only in their own minds that they think they possess so much knowledge. BFC3 rhe most arrogant condescending of them all. An absolute bellend.
Click to expand...
Not sure why you are being so unpleasant, do you not want a world far your Grandkids to live in?

My expertise is having helped run a county wide green business group, helping businesses green their activities and save money. Prior to that I ran food factories reducing waste and energy usage. From the comments of the experts on here that you so dislike, sounds like they have similar expertise.

Maybe you'd like to add something positive, rather than criticise those who do actually know what they are on about and pout it into practice every day.
 
Lost Seasider said:
What's your best guess at the effect that could be achieved if all of those measures could be implemented to the maximum realistic extent?

I'd guess about 0.1% of annual UK co2 emissions or delaying climate change by about 1 day at best.
Click to expand...

I'd say that unecessary vehicle journeys alone could reduce emmissions substantially and, of course, changing consumer habits would have a huge impact, as for example, would be a return to the use of more natural products in the production of clothing and building materials.

My best guess would be that a collective change in human habits, a focus on what I would call good housekeeping measures and tackling the low hanging fruit (i.e. obvious areas for efficiency), would drive CO2 reduction somewhere in the order of 20-30% for a typical household. That's my best guess based on my experience.

Lost Seasider said:
He's a BBC R4 presenter and hardly what I'd describe as an anti-environmentalist, it's chapter 5 if you're interested and he goes on to talk at length about the problems with identifying environmental savings and how attempts to enforce them can frequently be counterproductive, something that you might find helpful to understand.
Click to expand...

To be honest with you Lost, I see this attitude equivalent to 'Nero's Fiddling' and I really don't have any time for it. The article as read was just a ridiculously over-pessimistic slant that used largely unrealistic examples in order to try and make a point. As I said above, it's all about justifying inaction in my book.... I'm not saying that there isn't a need for Government to implement measures to promote and support the required changes, but it is individual human activity that has got us here and it will be individual human measures and action that get us out of this situation.

Lost Seasider said:
Well frankly I've no idea how individual responsibility is have any kind of material effect on the planet's population, and if you can think of any other word to describe the enforced elimiation of 3bn - 5bn people I'd be glad to hear it.
Click to expand...

There's no need to eliminate anyone...We just need to recognise that population reduction is desirable, accept that procreation needs to be limited and take individual responsibility. So basic birth control measures that enable us to achieve more manageable population by 2050 and beyond... It's not ideal, but it is necessary.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
Not sure why you are being so unpleasant, do you not want a world far your Grandkids to live in?

My expertise is having helped run a county wide green business group, helping businesses green their activities and save money. Prior to that I ran food factories reducing waste and energy usage. From the comments of the experts on here that you so dislike, sounds like they have similar expertise.

Maybe you'd like to add something positive, rather than criticise those who do actually know what they are on about and pout it into practice every day.
Click to expand...
any decision I make or take won't affect my grand children with regards to climate change. People like to talk the talk but that's it and bfc3 is a prime example of that. I read coppicemans post and his comparison with staging a boycott at a football club, of which I was one and climate change. The difference being it was a few thousand staging a boycott whereas the wotld population is pushing 8 billion and that's a helluva lot of people needing to change their lifestyle in order to make a difference.

Reading bfc3's post previous to this with regards to birth control just makes me snigger even more. No doubt he's got the solution to Covid, Afghanistan and the rest of the worlds problems too. Talk is cheap from the gas guzzling bifster. Maybe by keeping his gob shut just think how much C02 would not be escaping into the earths atmosphere.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
The IPCC report on climate change.

I am not here looking for a yaa-boo slanging match between the 'obvious suspects'. I think we're past all that. We must do something, as a World, as countries, as individuals.
Of course, the biggest polluters have the most to contribute: the USA, China, India and Europe. But, we must all do something and it must go beyond sorting our rubbish. Me and wife have taken out the log burner and are contemplating going down to one car. OK, it's a rather middle-class response but it's something.
I hope posters are on the same page.
Click to expand...
I’ve only read your OP 1966 and gone no further.....you aren’t looking for a slanging match on your thread?.....you may not be but I’ll bet it has resulted in that and I can virtually predict who will be into it spuds deep

Fact is nothing will change and it will end up where it ends up
 
Bloodtangerine said:
I’ve only read your OP 1966 and gone no further.....you aren’t looking for a slanging match on your thread?.....you may not be but I’ll bet it has resulted in that and I can virtually predict who will be into it spuds deep

Fact is nothing will change and it will end up where it ends up
Click to expand...
Yes it has. After a lot of good stuff from quite a few posters across the spectrum. That said, two posters in particular are being hard work for - to me - no good reason.
 
Tangerinemoss said:
Not sure why you are being so unpleasant, do you not want a world far your Grandkids to live in?

My expertise is having helped run a county wide green business group, helping businesses green their activities and save money. Prior to that I ran food factories reducing waste and energy usage. From the comments of the experts on here that you so dislike, sounds like they have similar expertise.

Maybe you'd like to add something positive, rather than criticise those who do actually know what they are on about and pout it into practice every day.
Click to expand...
"Not sure why you are being so unpleasant, do you not want a world far your Grandkids to live in?" That means nothing to a lot of people. all too often I have posed the same question and been met with the response, "that's their problem to sort out", or "cross that bridge when we come to it".
 
Last edited:
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
My best guess would be that a collective change in human habits, a focus on what I would call good housekeeping measures and tackling the low hanging fruit (i.e. obvious areas for efficiency), would drive CO2 reduction somewhere in the order of 20-30% for a typical household. That's my best guess based on my experience.
Click to expand...

Ah okay, so what are these low hanging fruit?

The areas listed so far account for maybe 0.1% of UK annual emissions, so I'm interested where the remaining 29.9% are.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Lost, I'll try one last time. I said in my OP, that it requires the huge polluters to do their bit. I've also said that individuals should do their bit. I've also said that all plauers- individuals, States, businesses and industries- have to all do something. Please don't use your dismissal of individualist efforts in order to dismiss the World's needs to address climate change.
Click to expand...

And I'm saying that "the world" and huge polluters need to do "their bit", but the idea that individuals can do "their bit" in any meaningful way is absurd, flies in the face of basic economics, and is in the end likely counter-productive.
 
Lost Seasider said:
Ah okay, so what are these low hanging fruit?

The areas listed so far account for maybe 0.1% of UK annual emissions, so I'm interested where the remaining 29.9% are.
Click to expand...

Do you want to back up that 0.1% number with some evidence?

A simple change like having an extra meat free day would result in a 0.25 - 0.50 % reduction in household carbon emissions.

Transport alone makes up around 30% of the average household Carbon Footprint and arguably a good 30% of car travel is totally unnecessary.

Food Waste is a further issue and at every stage in the process.

Then there’s household energy consumption at around a further 30% of the C Footprint… The most basic efficiency measures would deliver 20% + reduction in usage.

That’s before we even come on to consumables, other positive action such as a focus on the local environment and green spaces.
 
Matesrates said:
Ban cars, we all have to use public transport, or walk, or cycle. We didn’t have cars just over a century ago.
Click to expand...
Banning cars simply couldn't work in a country as vast as Australia I'm afraid. We live 'near to town' yet it's still a 40 minutes car ride to get to a grocery store.
 
Has anyone actually read the report?

Within it, they conclude (predict) that, between 1800 and 2040 the global temperature will have increased by 1.5 degrees.

If you start the debate with that as your context I’d imagine a lot of these posts would be very different.
 
Methinks Lost Seasider is in the pay of those with a vested interest in trashing our ecosystems for profit, or at least aspires to make themself popular with them. Why else would anyone churn out such drivel? I'd stick to promoting gambling and snaffling free tickets for sporting events if I were he. Easier pickings for one of AVFTT's shiftiest posters.
 
20togo said:
any decision I make or take won't affect my grand children with regards to climate change. People like to talk the talk but that's it and bfc3 is a prime example of that. I read coppicemans post and his comparison with staging a boycott at a football club, of which I was one and climate change. The difference being it was a few thousand staging a boycott whereas the wotld population is pushing 8 billion and that's a helluva lot of people needing to change their lifestyle in order to make a difference.
Click to expand...
Your first sentence made me shake my head. Your second sentence made me laugh.

But the serious point I wanted to make was about the rest of it. You are right that there are a lot of people - and Governments, and businesses - who have to change the way they do things. But it's like chipping away at a block of ice. You have to start somewhere, and the more people who get involved, the more inroads you make.

Your couldn't care less attitude is very common, sadly, and a large part of the problem.
 
1966_and_all_that said:
Lost and 20s. Sorry guys, it's not telling tales, just frustration at your approach to the thread.
Click to expand...
Frustration, don't make me laugh. BFC3 telling the world what needs to be done.He has all the answers don't ya know. In a country of 65 million he thinks he's got the right to tell the near 8 billion people of the world what they are all doing wrong. Dare I suggest he pops over to Afghanistan and tries to enforce his views on the Taliban.
coppiceman said:
Your first sentence made me shake my head. Your second sentence made me laugh.

But the serious point I wanted to make was about the rest of it. You are right that there are a lot of people - and Governments, and businesses - who have to change the way they do things. But it's like chipping away at a block of ice. You have to start somewhere, and the more people who get involved, the more inroads you make.

Your couldn't care less attitude is very common, sadly, and a large part of the problem.
Click to expand...
It's not a couldn't care less attitude at all. It just makes me laugh at the usual gobshites on here who purport to have all the answers. Suddenly people like bfc3 want to be the conscience of the world whilst not long back I believe he was driving round in his gas guzzling 4x4.
I daresay too that when the world gets back to normal many on here will be jumping on planes for holidays or travelling the length and breadth of the country in their cars/motor homes/caravans. So many talk the talk but that's all they do.

Meanwhile,I'll tell my grandkids that they are not allowed to go to Disney because the gobshites on AVFTT want to save the world. I'd rather do that with them rather than explain when in countless centuries time the world ends one day earlier than it would have done if they hadn't gone to Florida..Needless to say, none of us or them will be around when that time comes.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
Do you want to back up that 0.1% number with some evidence?
Click to expand...

Why? Nobody else has.

I recon 0.03% of annual co2 output for savings on school journeys (that's easy enough to calculate), I doubt many people are using tumble dryers when alternatives are available, hand washing dishes is likely less efficient than using a dishwasher, cycling to shops is wildly impractical for most, and I'll leave you to work out the rest for yourself.

Anyway I'm wasting my time here, if it's any comfort Xi Jinping thanks you for your sacrifice, at your most optomistic you're looking at saving enough co2 to delay global warming by 3 - 4 days (you'll have to work that out for yourself too).
 
20togo said:
Meanwhile,I'll tell my grandkids that they are not allowed to go to Disney because the gobshites on AVFTT want to save the world. I'd rather do that with them rather than explain when in countless centuries time the world ends one day earlier than it would have done if they hadn't gone to Florida..Needless to say, none of us or them will be around when that time comes.
Click to expand...
Happy days then.
 
Lytham_fy8 said:
Says the most irritable, miserable, argumentative bellend on here.
Click to expand...
Can't possibly be miserable when I disagree with all the shiite you come out with. It makes me happy, you dope. It makes me laugh when you say you ignore me but you don't half bite every rime I comment on this side of the forum. And you think it's the other way round. Haha..
 
Lost Seasider said:
Why? Nobody else has.

I recon 0.03% of annual co2 output for savings on school journeys (that's easy enough to calculate), I doubt many people are using tumble dryers when alternatives are available, hand washing dishes is likely less efficient than using a dishwasher, cycling to shops is wildly impractical for most, and I'll leave you to work out the rest for yourself.

Anyway I'm wasting my time here, if it's any comfort Xi Jinping thanks you for your sacrifice, at your most optomistic you're looking at saving enough co2 to delay global warming by 3 - 4 days (you'll have to work that out for yourself too).
Click to expand...
I was simply quoting a short list of very obvious examples where individuals can make CO2 savings to counterbalance the ridiculous “Dave decided to drink milk instead of his usual coffee” argument…I’d have thought it obvious that the list wasn’t intended to be exhaustive…. So why are you choosing to play silly games and pretend that was what I intended?

As for ‘impractical’… I suggest that mass migration and the devastating long term effects of worsening climate change might be a tad more ‘inconvenient’….. Jeez, if ‘inconvenience’ is genuinely intended to be a realistic counter-argument we really are fecked!!

You’re right, you are wasting your time, because despite you consistently demanding supporting evidence from all and sundry, when it suits, you have failed spectacularly to provide anything of substance to back up your flimsy argument… The best you can do is link a fictional article extracted from a journo’s book.

Please share the basis for your 0.03% easy calculation.

EDIT: Have you also considered the Irony of pointing the finger at China, when we and everyone else import all manner of garbage from them.
 
Last edited:
20togo said:
Meanwhile,I'll tell my grandkids that they are not allowed to go to Disney because the gobshites on AVFTT want to save the world.
Click to expand...
You're more likely to be telling them they can't go to Disney because it's under three feet of water.
 
BFC_BFC_BFC said:
EDIT: Have you also considered the Irony of pointing the finger at China, when we and everyone else import all manner of garbage from them.
Click to expand...
....yep including Covid although some-one on here thinks they are blameless. Now where is that pussy? Here pussy pussy.
 
20togo said:
What, in the next three or four years? Where's that info or are you making it up?
Click to expand...
I'm talking about in your grandchildren's lifetime. Florida is pretty low lying, didn't you know that? he Guardian ran an article not long back saying large parts of it could be under three feet of water by 2060. That was before the latest warnings.

It's all easy to find on the internet, you could just go and look instead of giving it all the attitude.
 
TomGxPool said:
I'm talking about in your grandchildren's lifetime. Florida is pretty low lying, didn't you know that? he Guardian ran an article not long back saying large parts of it could be under three feet of water by 2060. That was before the latest warnings.

It's all easy to find on the internet, you could just go and look instead of giving it all the attitude.
Click to expand...
You're bullshitting. You initially said what I am likely to telling them, so that's in my lifetime isn't it?
 
20togo said:
You're bullshitting. You initially said what I am likely to telling them, so that's in my lifetime isn't it?
Click to expand...
I was just backing up a point made by someone else about how short-sighted your attitude is. If you want to try to score minor points about language, go ahead. The central point remains - the planet is in dire trouble, and needs a big effort from everyone to make it less serious (can't stop it entirely now).

The point that was put to you was that people like you are part of the problem. I was just agreeing with it, that's all. You've completely ignored that.
 
TomGxPool said:
I was just backing up a point made by someone else about how short-sighted your attitude is. If you want to try to score minor points about language, go ahead. The central point remains - the planet is in dire trouble, and needs a big effort from everyone to make it less serious (can't stop it entirely now).

The point that was put to you was that people like you are part of the problem. I was just agreeing with it, that's all. You've completely ignored that.
Click to expand...
Nope, more bullshit. I made the point first about what I'd be telling my grandkids. That was MY point, nothing else. Not my problem you're now back tracking to talk about my grandkids life time. And yet here I am being part of the problem whilst reading all these threads about people going on holidays touring around Scotland. And another thread on camper vans v motor homes. Why not preach to them about giving up their holidays to think of the planet and the climate or is it alright for them to do that?.
In other words spare me your sanctimonious claptrap.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top