How concerned are you about climate change?

I make a conscious effort not to worry about things beyond my control, which this is for the most part.

I also have a natural tendency to think that things are never as bad (or as good) as everyone makes out. So whilst climate change is a worry, I reckon things might take longer than everyone thinks. This is based on zero scientific evidence, its just a natural personality trait and I'm not saying its a good one.

That said, I don't drive (I cycle and walk everywhere), we do have a hybrid that the wife drives (and obviously I do get in it sometimes), I recycle, I don't eat meat (but I'm not vegan) and I am trying to get rid of all gas appliances in my house (only the boiler to go). So I'm taking some level of action, but everyone could do more. The top and bottom of it is most people will only do what is convenient for them, even the XR and JSO guys. One of my good mates is one and he rides a fecking massive motorbike to work but tells everyone on Facebook to stop going on holiday.
 
Last edited:
BoroMart said:
Bit isn’t this just big oil misinformation. All evidence is that over the life of an EV it is far less detrimental to the planet. Same with wind turbines https://orsted.com/en/insights/the-fact-file/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-offshore-wind
Click to expand...

Plenty of papers argue every which way, the big green lobby is just as bad as big oil.

I know that a wind turbine takes £65000 of specialised oil to run... Every year.
That is a fact.

And when it comes to EVs lithium mining is a horror show.
 
alvez_49 said:
Plenty of papers argue every which way, the big green lobby is just as bad as big oil.

I know that a wind turbine takes £65000 of specialised oil to run... Every year.
That is a fact.

And when it comes to EVs lithium mining is a horror show.
Click to expand...
Yeah but is it grapeseed oil?
 
Very concerned. A slightly different angle.

I come from a family of farmers (although I am no longer involved day to day) and I think in terms of climate, farmers have been seeing direct impact for quite some time, which has an impact for the world as a whole.

Crops are becoming increasingly unpredictable as climate changes. Government policy is all over the place - i.e. taking land out of production here while signing trade deals with countries overseas where they have much lower standards, so effectively exporting our green burden, so that it is out of sight and out of mind. We import so many of our staples, for example tomatoes from Spain and even the Netherlands from greenhouses, but many of those are simply uneconomical to run (especially in NL) as they are very dependent on fossil fuels to maintain. In Spain drought and high temperatures are threatening producers there too.

The piece around eating less meat is an interesting one. I see a lot on TV which focuses on intensive methods, such as the huge cattle lots in the US and the deforestation of the Amazon. While the government is trying to get trade deals over the line with the US and Brazil, these are the things the public has to be aware of and care about. The production systems used over there are very different to those used over here (although there are some 'mega farms' starting to appear over here, which worries me).

We have farmed in a mixed way for generations - by mixed I mean both arable and livestock. The manure generated by the cattle over winter serves two purposes - it allows us to drastically reduce our synthetic fertiliser use, but crucially re-introduces organic matter into the soil, to build resilience and long term sustainability. We also use rotational grass leys where we have issues with certain weeds to reduce our pesticide burden, those grass leys are grazed over several years to ensure all the seeds are removed by the cattle and sheep and can then be returned to productive arable land. The permanent pasture land we have is grazed, which in itself is a carbon sink. Grazed grass is a reliable way to permanently sequester CO2 - it takes it out the atmosphere and returns it to the soil, where it is trapped. By grazing the land, the grass has more vigorous growth and removes more carbon. Our model for farming relies absolutely on the cattle and sheep as part of a balanced and sustainable approach. On a different note, we have been involved with Country Stewardship initiatives for as long as I can remember.

Has farming contributed to climate change? Absolutely. I saw an interesting graphic at Rothamsted Research Centre on population growth - since 1850 the global population has grown from around 1bn to 8bn. As a species we have actually become far too successful - there are more of us and we live longer, we consume more, we put greater pressure on all natural resources - nowhere is this pressure more acute than in the need to feed the planet.

Does farming have to change? Absolutely. I believe that everything we do today in all aspects of life will have to be done differently in the near future.
 
Last edited:
alvez_49 said:
Also angry that 'Green' energy actually tends to be a misleading pile of **** like the very specific expensive oil that goes in wind turbines every year, the lithium ore mined to make EVs (and the fact it's running out sharply) etc..
Click to expand...
It isn't. The lithium lies have got a lot of traction but it isn't "running out sharply".
 
Extremely concerned, more for my kids than I am for me. Very concerned about the amount of misinformation funded by big oil that is alive and well everywhere, even on this board, rolling out the same old tired and disproven arguments. Are all of the solutions we have right now perfect ? of course they aren't ... but there is a central immediate problem that needs urgent action ... its a case of priorities.
 
BoroMart said:
Bit isn’t this just big oil misinformation. All evidence is that over the life of an EV it is far less detrimental to the planet. Same with wind turbines https://orsted.com/en/insights/the-fact-file/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-offshore-wind
Click to expand...
It seems that way. The big oil companies have deep deep pockets and they have done a really good job on this. They have spread the lithium lie so hard that people now think it's a proven fact when it isn't. They tried it with cobalt too. Interesting that, for the EV batteries with cobalt on, there was outrage at child mining. Yet it's largely unknown that cobalt is used to refine oil into petrol. It shows how the misinformation can be utilised by the people with the deepest pockets
 
I have kids, but the thing is we can't reverse it all can we? The damage is mostly done, its just a case of how much more damage we do, and the biggest countries don't care anyway. Kids will live in their world, not ours. The planet will be incinerated by nuclear weapons before climate change brings it all to an end. I'm genuinely more worried about that than climate change, even though I do try to do my bit.
 
exiledinboro said:
ST, electric cars are part of the problem, but are a better alternative than petrol/diesel but they’re still terrible for the environment
Click to expand...

Thats a very broad "all encompassing" statement and not at all reflective of the role they play ... for example, it depends how many miles you drive. The more miles you drive the better they are. Pretty much all their "impact" is up front loaded. Also, processes for these are improving all the time, so this, albeit far from ideal situation (but better than what we have) is also getting better. Its not the panacea some claim it is, but its also nowhere near as bad as some like to portray them, and its getting better all the time. You do enough miles in them, they have a much better impact on the environment ... if you only use it to run back and forth to the shops 3 times a week then yeah, not so good.
 
alvez_49 said:
Plenty of papers argue every which way, the big green lobby is just as bad as big oil.

I know that a wind turbine takes £65000 of specialised oil to run... Every year.
That is a fact.

And when it comes to EVs lithium mining is a horror show.
Click to expand...
what matters is empirical scientific evidence, and that is on the side that man made climate change is real. The link I provided covers operational cost of wind turbines (economic and ecological). As it's looking at offshore where there are harsher conditions requiring more oil and higher install and maintenance costs due to requiring big boats to transport out to sea, then land turbines will be even more financially and ecologically sound. Of course nothing is free, but wind turbines are superb value and ecologically brilliant.

As for EV batteries, we've been mining lithium for a very long time, all mining is ecologically harmful, but the harm is overstated to undermine the concept of EVs, because russia and the arab nations have had 70 years of unlimited wealth and want to protect it. The lifetime ecological cost has been proven time and time again by peer reviewed scientists to be far lower than the lifetime costs of any ICE car.
 
m3t4tr0n said:
Thats a very broad "all encompassing" statement and not at all reflective of the role they play ... for example, it depends how many miles you drive. The more miles you drive the better they are. Pretty much all their "impact" is up front loaded. Also, processes for these are improving all the time, so this, albeit far from ideal situation (but better than what we have) is also getting better. Its not the panacea some claim it is, but its also nowhere near as bad as some like to portray them, and its getting better all the time. You do enough miles in them, they have a much better impact on the environment ... if you only use it to run back and forth to the shops 3 times a week then yeah, not so good.
Click to expand...
The thing is, most people don't want to stop driving, so whilst they're better than what we have, they're not the magic bullet either. The debate will rumble on. If everyone really wanted to contribute they'd all stop driving, this is what I mean about the damage being done, driving is just too ingrained in our culture now, the genie is out of the bottle. Most people would rather see the planet burn (eventually) than stop driving and flying entirely. And I say this as a car owner (even though I don't drive it, it doesn't matter who drives it).
 
Probably the biggest thing we Joe public can do (and even then it's more as a collective than individuals) is to vote for a government who'll take more action, invest in the right things and pressure other countries to take more action. Only the government has the real levers.

Of course an issue with that is we only have choice of two. And neither party are exactly putting it as the priority it needs to be. But one is better than the other. Don't get me wrong, I'm sure helicopter rides are great fun but I'm not sure they're the transportation of choice for a leader who takes the issue seriously.

Now if we had PR, then the answer would be a lot more obvious as to what we could do.
 
sparkins said:
Has farming contributed to climate change? Absolutely. I saw an interesting graphic at Rothamsted Research Centre on population growth - since 1850 the global population has grown from around 1bn to 8bn. As a race we have actually become far too successful - there are more of us and we live longer, we consume more, we put greater pressure on all natural resources - nowhere is this pressure more acute than in the need to feed the planet.
Click to expand...
this is spot on. Intensive farming is at least partially done to satisfy the increasing demand of a growing population (of course some is done to satisfy profit margins too). Something has to be done to reduce populations, disincentivisation for having kids. It needs a global approach too. If not, it will end up in huge global conflict as resources become more scarce.
 
SmallTown said:
Yes.
Look at the recovery the ozone layer made when we banned CFCs. Man made climate change is reversible. True we need the planets help but we must do what we can
Click to expand...
Well fair enough, I'm sure you're right. But until India, China, Russia, Brazil and the USA all start to worry as much as we are on this thread, we can't reverse much I don't think? Not saying we shouldn't try, but it doesn't keep me awake at night for that reason - I can't influence them and its effectively out of my hands. I'll continue recycling, walking/cycling and not eating meat though.
 
exiledinboro said:
I can’t really be bothered having the electric car debate. Personally I think the solution and future needs better answers like subsidised public transport, less personal choice and investment in public transport
Click to expand...
electric or ICE subsidised public transport?
 
I am with Atypical on his comment above and perhaps have a much more cynical view, the damage is done in the main, caused by us and rich countries like us. We can’t criticise poorer countries for relying on fossil fuels too much as we would not be where we are climate wise, due to the way we have got wealthier due to milking it, and they generally do not have the wherewithal to jump to green energies without help.

I do worry far more about the risk of nuclear weapons being launched by trigger happy despots as a parting legacy and a desire to have their name remembered by those lucky, or should I say unlucky enough to survive. It is only a matter of time before dirty bombs are created and used by terrorists around the world on a much smaller scale, the amount of soft targets is immense, we are all complacent as we mingle. Countries like Iran and North Korea worry me, Pakistan has them and I have no doubt the reason we pay money to some countries through our foreign aid is as some form of insurance policy of sorts.

Climate change is undoubtedly a big worry though, for the kids and grandkids more so. I could do a lot more than I have to date. I am thinking that when I receive my State Pension in a few years time, I will go down the solar panel route, but things may change. I am not impressed with the ASHP situation as of now and was rather hoping hydrogen technology would be advancing quicker than it seems to be. I drive a non electric vehicle, but use it far less than I used to and in a few years will use the bus a lot more. Following the Boro away I use the train, recycle everything that can be and use supermarket delivery more to reduce vehicle use. It isn’t a lot and I am open to change, but the government needs to help drive down costs and improve efficiencies before most households will jump. I genuinely think goalposts will get moved back on EV’s Gas boilers etc and when I look at other G20 nations I understand why some think ‘whats the point’.
 
Yes, I'm concerned
Car is now fully electric from a PHEV
My partner sold hers - we now have just one between us and we get by
I'm plant based because I believe that helps

The hypocrisy - I fly far too much for leisure

Am I doing enough? - No

Does that really matter? Probably not

What I'd like to see? You are allowed 1 return flight per person per year.....
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top