-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
-
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
I read that too on this thread but still don't know jack about it.
-
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
I read that too on this thread but still don't know jack about it.
Did you read the article I linked to? The guy does a pretty good job of explaining the shortcomings of renewable energy sources and the benefits of nuclear. I agree that I am generally happy to defer to experts on this. My main vested interests are cheaper power, and it would be good if we stopped pumping pollution into the environment as we don't really understand the long-term consequences of that, so am trying to understand it at least in layman's terms
-
@No-Quarter said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Hooroo said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
i DON'T REALLY THINK ABOUT IT AS LIVE I IN A COUNTRY THAT DOESN'T REQUIRE IT. (Damn Caps)
When I lived in England, I didn't think about it much there either, was just happy to have the energy coming into my home.
In the context of this thread it seems to be far and away the best source of energy if we want to avoid CO2 emissions and other pollution, albeit with some risks attached.
Our resident climate change/renewable energy expert is yet to comment - @NTA
He's just polishing the Power Wall.
-
@Rancid-Schnitzel it sparks joy.
Anyway, nuclear. I'm actually a fan. I think it ticks pretty much every box in terms of reliability, emissions, and safety - IF it is done right and the required steps aren't skipped.
The problem? It costs a fuckton to set up.
Over its lifespan - which could be as long as 80 years - a nuclear power plant is actually one of the cheapest options going around. That wasn't a problem when government owned the infrastructure from the generation through transmission, distribution, and right down to the switchboard on your house/business.
They generally don't do that any more in Australia, because privatisation of networks and the retail market not getting the level of competition promised. Long story.
The only way someone would consider a nuclear plant in Oz* is if a government body underwrote their losses for (say) 30-50 years. That is a big ask for any modern financier, after all. The government would run screaming to renewables before sinking taxpayer money into that.
The waste can be an issue, though we have heaps of wide brown nothing to store it in. If you want to avoid waste, you get yourself a Gen IV reactor which burns almost all the fissile material.
Gen IV reactors are yet to enter commercial use outside Russia - which therefore makes it highly likely their Gen IV is complete bullshit and not doing what it says. The reason? Gen IV is waaaaaaaaaaay more expensive than your garden variety reactor.
Nobody is going to pay overs to save the planet, after all.
The other thing we really need to look into is SMR - Small Modular Reactor - tech. Higher cost / MWh than a standard "big" reactor, these little chaps are going to be very important for extraplanetary journeys where the ships are likely to be nuke-powered, and colonies established using nuclear. Long running, minimal maintenance, less issues with cracks and water use.
It may be that we rapidly build nuclear if the naysaying about renewables (hydro, solar, wind, geothermal, storage, etc) don't end up getting close to what we need. But most models have renewables - in Australia at least - comfortably serving above 70%. And the advancement in tech probably pushes it closer to 95% in the next 5 years.
*presuming they've overcome the hurdle of getting Federal Government approval to even contemplate it as we have legislation around preventing that
-
Nuclear is the way forward. When it's required.
It should never be required in NZ as the natural resources available crossed with a relatively small population means other means should have more than adequate coverage.
Up in the North though, including Japan, population density is much much higher therefore it seems like a genuinely strong solution.
-
So this "extinction rebellion" group have been causing some disruption of transport in London and have had over 300 activists arrested. For those that don't know, its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025. They have blockaded Oxford Circus (which is part of my daily commute) for 3 days now.
No matter what your views on climate change, both the problem itself and any solutions are going to have a profound impact on the economy and people's standards of living across the globe in the coming decades. So addressing it, as a society, needs reasoned debate and majority buy-in. The whole narrative of "this is an emergency there's no time to argue just do what we say" is bullshit and an unstealthy version of social control.
-
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
So this "extinction rebellion" group have been causing some disruption of transport in London and have had over 300 activists arrested. For those that don't know, its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025. They have blockaded Oxford Circus (which is part of my daily commute) for 3 days now.
No matter what your views on climate change, both the problem itself and any solutions are going to have a profound impact on the economy and people's standards of living across the globe in the coming decades. So addressing it, as a society, needs reasoned debate and majority buy-in. The whole narrative of "this is an emergency there's no time to argue just do what we say" is bullshit and an unstealthy version of social control.
TBF (even though they are ferals) the message isn't as you describe.
The message is that debate and evidence has been continually ignored over short term needs/desires and the situation not adequately addressed.
I do agree with that statement (if not the exact means of getting it across) so have a little sympathy. They are also maintaining a peaceful non violent stance and when deemed to be breaking the law are being arrested.
Let it play out. -
@TeWaio The product of climate hysteria sadly. Like the moronic vegans who shut down Melbourne a couple weeks back the only thing these fucksticks are going to achieve is more people despising them and wanting to pick a team that isn't them.
-
@Crucial said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
So this "extinction rebellion" group have been causing some disruption of transport in London and have had over 300 activists arrested. For those that don't know, its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025. They have blockaded Oxford Circus (which is part of my daily commute) for 3 days now.
No matter what your views on climate change, both the problem itself and any solutions are going to have a profound impact on the economy and people's standards of living across the globe in the coming decades. So addressing it, as a society, needs reasoned debate and majority buy-in. The whole narrative of "this is an emergency there's no time to argue just do what we say" is bullshit and an unstealthy version of social control.
TBF (even though they are ferals) the message isn't as you describe.
The message is that debate and evidence has been continually ignored over short term needs/desires and the situation not adequately addressed.
I do agree with that statement (if not the exact means of getting it across) so have a little sympathy. They are also maintaining a peaceful non violent stance and when deemed to be breaking the law are being arrested.
Let it play out.They do seem to be the only people taking the latest IPCC report to heart. Everyone else has simply acknowledged we won't and can't make meaningful change in the time frame left. So it's time to do what humans have always done; adapt, improvise and overcome.
-
@Crucial said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
So this "extinction rebellion" group have been causing some disruption of transport in London and have had over 300 activists arrested. For those that don't know, its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025. They have blockaded Oxford Circus (which is part of my daily commute) for 3 days now.
No matter what your views on climate change, both the problem itself and any solutions are going to have a profound impact on the economy and people's standards of living across the globe in the coming decades. So addressing it, as a society, needs reasoned debate and majority buy-in. The whole narrative of "this is an emergency there's no time to argue just do what we say" is bullshit and an unstealthy version of social control.
TBF (even though they are ferals) the message isn't as you describe.
The message is that debate and evidence has been continually ignored over short term needs/desires and the situation not adequately addressed.
I do agree with that statement (if not the exact means of getting it across) so have a little sympathy. They are also maintaining a peaceful non violent stance and when deemed to be breaking the law are being arrested.
Let it play out.So, I described it as:
" its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025."
From their twitter bio (emphasis mine):
" Non-violent direct action and civil disobedience for action on climate breakdown and ecological collapse."
From their website (emphasis mine):
"Government must act now to halt biodiversity loss and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025."
So fair enough, "zero carbon economy by 2025" and "greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025" aren't exactly the same thing, but pretty bloody close.
Broader point is that they are trying to hijack the debate by shutting it down, effectively saying "my(our) way or the highway". Which in my opinion is a completely fucked way of addressing a genuinely important issue.
-
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@Crucial said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@TeWaio said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
So this "extinction rebellion" group have been causing some disruption of transport in London and have had over 300 activists arrested. For those that don't know, its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025. They have blockaded Oxford Circus (which is part of my daily commute) for 3 days now.
No matter what your views on climate change, both the problem itself and any solutions are going to have a profound impact on the economy and people's standards of living across the globe in the coming decades. So addressing it, as a society, needs reasoned debate and majority buy-in. The whole narrative of "this is an emergency there's no time to argue just do what we say" is bullshit and an unstealthy version of social control.
TBF (even though they are ferals) the message isn't as you describe.
The message is that debate and evidence has been continually ignored over short term needs/desires and the situation not adequately addressed.
I do agree with that statement (if not the exact means of getting it across) so have a little sympathy. They are also maintaining a peaceful non violent stance and when deemed to be breaking the law are being arrested.
Let it play out.So, I described it as:
" its a radical climate change action group that encourages civil disobedience in order to achieve the aim of a zero carbon economy by 2025."
From their twitter bio (emphasis mine):
" Non-violent direct action and civil disobedience for action on climate breakdown and ecological collapse."
From their website (emphasis mine):
"Government must act now to halt biodiversity loss and reduce greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025."
So fair enough, "zero carbon economy by 2025" and "greenhouse gas emissions to net zero by 2025" aren't exactly the same thing, but pretty bloody close.
Broader point is that they are trying to hijack the debate by shutting it down, effectively saying "my(our) way or the highway". Which in my opinion is a completely fucked way of addressing a genuinely important issue.
Fair view. I was referring more to … "The whole narrative of "this is an emergency there's no time to argue just do what we say" is bullshit and an unstealthy version of social control."
Protest doesn't get into nuance, protest is about slogans and chanting. I agree that this can appear like a simplistic 'do as we say' view but as you quote yourself it is more about trying to force the govt's hand to make the firm commitments they have managed to avoid or waffle around.
Of course it is a complex subject, but also one that many govts only pay lip service or token statements to.
I doubt it will force any kind of quick reaction but if a message gets through to pull finger then it is a good thing IMO. The civil unrest thing is a PITA for some but, as I said, let it play out.
The alternative is to have a 'green party' holding balance of power. I think I'd rather have the main parties wake up.
BTW I work a few minutes from Oxford Circus and have been unaffected by the civil disobedience so maybe that slants my view.
-
Interesting, pretty impressive stuff in the Uk regarding reducing greenhouse gases.
-
@jegga Great article.
I'd argue climate alarmism could very well be a bigger issue than climate change itself.The orangutan attacking the digger is a great example.
But why are Borneo’s forests being cut down? The reason, as Attenborough said, is palm oil, a lucrative crop used in products ranging from soap to biscuits. Unfortunately, he left out the final stage of the argument.
Half of all the millions of tons of palm oil sent to Europe is used to make ‘biofuel’, thanks to an EU directive stating that, by 2020, ten per cent of forecourt fuel must come from ‘renewable’ biological sources. Malaysia says this has ‘created an unprecedented demand’.
-
@Rembrandt said in Climate Change #3 & Other Environmental Issues:
@jegga Great article.
I'd argue climate alarmism could very well be a bigger issue than climate change itself.Was just reading this earlier today...
Climate Activism: An Ideology in Search of a Justification
FRIDAY, APRIL 19, 2019
[...]
[A]pocalyptic claims were commonplace at the time of the first Earth Day event in 1970, when environmentalists confidently predicted a complete exhaustion of the world’s oil supply by the year 2000. In subsequent years the environmentalist movement en masse adopted the logic of the famously failed Malthusian doomsayer Paul Ehrlich to suggest an imminent death spiral in the oil-based-energy market, setting a deadline for the global conversion away from fossil fuels.
[...]
Climate Change