Climate Change | UN Report: Code Red for humanity

barros said:
How do you would resolve the energy problems in UK? Wind farms kills thousands of birds every year including eagles and other protected species, solar is very inconsistent and about energy at night?
Click to expand...

This is a poor argument. Specially when you compare it with other structures (that you will not get rid of)

https://science.howstuffworks.com/environmental/green-science/wind-turbine-kill-birds.htm

Also there is always continuous improvement

And then we have Oil sands

http://www.worldwatch.org/node/6052

That if they build the ones that they are planning in Canada, would be a whopping death toll of 3 million a year, way more than the windmills and that is just directly

No worries that if the climate change goes as expected because of the fossil fuels usage, birds (and many other animals) will die by the billions and will go extinct
 
shamans said:
https://ourworldindata.org/grapher/pm25-air-pollution

Here's another graph. Difference between east and west can be seen.
Click to expand...

That's air pollution, which is related to climate change, but also a result of several different factors.

Look at cumulative CO2 emissions and CO2 per capita and its quite clear that the West has to take the lead on this: https://ourworldindata.org/co2-and-other-greenhouse-gas-emissions

Also check out the climate action tracker: https://climateactiontracker.org/countries/
 
nickm said:
We should be putting insane amounts of money into fission research (as well as fusion research, and renewables). Our current fission reactors are based on 1950s designs, because nobody's wanted to invest. The priority has to be to eliminate CO2 emissions. If nuclear can help with that, it just has to be on the table as an option for generating baseload power. (Some private individuals like Bill Gates is funding new, alternative designs but it doesn't feel like enough).
Click to expand...

Regarding new nuclear power stations, it is clear that the UK government was not prepared to invest. And as a result it has turned to EDF to build the new facility at Hinckley Point in Somerset with additional funding from China. And we have just been informed that the cost is increasing and the timetable slipping.
Meanwhile, the government has had to guarantee a price for the electricity which is significantly higher than the reducing costs of renewables.

The holy grail is nuclear fusion which is still very much in the experimental stage. Fusing Hydrogen into Helium, with the resulting loss of mass requires a massive amount of energy to get the right temperature and pressure in order to create the conditions for fusion to take place.
It has been done but only momentarily and requiring far more energy in than out.
 
Buster15 said:
Regarding new nuclear power stations, it is clear that the UK government was not prepared to invest. And as a result it has turned to EDF to build the new facility at Hinckley Point in Somerset with additional funding from China. And we have just been informed that the cost is increasing and the timetable slipping.
Meanwhile, the government has had to guarantee a price for the electricity which is significantly higher than the reducing costs of renewables.

The holy grail is nuclear fusion which is still very much in the experimental stage. Fusing Hydrogen into Helium, with the resulting loss of mass requires a massive amount of energy to get the right temperature and pressure in order to create the conditions for fusion to take place.
It has been done but only momentarily and requiring far more energy in than out.
Click to expand...
We spend feck all on fusion research really. And I look at ITER and its size and complexities and wonder whether that can ever be the answer. Although there are some interesting new approaches coming out of the US that utilise some amazing recent advances in high temperature superconductors.
 
nickm said:
We spend feck all on fusion research really. And I look at ITER and its size and complexities and wonder whether that can ever be the answer. Although there are some interesting new approaches coming out of the US that utilise some amazing recent advances in high temperature superconductors.
Click to expand...

Yes. As you will know, the UK was part of a European programme and after we leave, it absolutely vital that we continue to invest in fusion development.

The most recent US developments are using hugely powerful lasers to focus it on a tiny spec, I believe of Tritium order to generate the many millions of degrees K.
Because of the laws of energy conservation, it is going to be incredibly difficult to get more energy out than put in.
 
For Greta haters here is her statement



Worth a read to see how genuine she is. I don't know if it will be a short story, but the awareness that she created, specially on young people, is amazing and even people without hope like me are a bit less hopeless seen the new generation at least be way more aware than mine and all without the cynical perspective of the adults.
 
4bars said:
For Greta haters here is her statement



Worth a read to see how genuine she is. I don't know if it will be a short story, but the awareness that she created, specially on young people, is amazing and even people without hope like me are a bit less hopeless seen the new generation at least be way more aware than mine and all without the cynical perspective of the adults.
Click to expand...


Nah mate, the key thing is how cringey she is. The enormity of climate change generally is a mere anecdote
 
nickm said:
We should be putting insane amounts of money into fission research (as well as fusion research, and renewables). Our current fission reactors are based on 1950s designs, because nobody's wanted to invest. The priority has to be to eliminate CO2 emissions. If nuclear can help with that, it just has to be on the table as an option for generating baseload power. (Some private individuals like Bill Gates is funding new, alternative designs but it doesn't feel like enough).
Click to expand...
The last time I did a deep dive on it, fission seemed like the clearest way forward to providing cleaner baseload electricity generation for industrialized areas until other things came of age.

There seems to have been little political will to pursue it though. Outside of perhaps China, who is less concerned with ‘not in my backyard’ brigades and had desperate need to clean up their air.
 
stepic said:
Just taking the piss out of the others who weirdly seem to focus on her as an individual more than the (far more important) point she’s making.
Click to expand...

Yes, that is what is cringey
 
4bars said:
For Greta haters here is her statement



Worth a read to see how genuine she is. I don't know if it will be a short story, but the awareness that she created, specially on young people, is amazing and even people without hope like me are a bit less hopeless seen the new generation at least be way more aware than mine and all without the cynical perspective of the adults.
Click to expand...


"I should be in school not here".

Yeah no one else would skip their mundane classes building a million dollar resume speaking at the U.N. That speech was cringe. The whole "I'm a child so me speaking should move you" schtick does not work.

I am not ridiculing her or have anything against her. It just wasn't a good speech, simple as that.
 
shamans said:
The claps make the speech very cringey.
Click to expand...
Then its them to blame, not her.

Also, are you expecting a 16 years old girl to have a speech (she says that wrotes them herself with a few imputs) as a seasoned politician?

And most important. Is fair to kill and focus on the messenger when the message is what it matters and is what we should be focus on? isn't hat really what is cringey?
 
4bars said:
Then its them to blame, not her.

Also, are you expecting a 16 years old girl to have a speech (she says that wrotes them herself with a few imputs) as a seasoned politician?

And most important. Is fair to kill and focus on the messenger when the message is what it matters and is what we should be focus on? isn't hat really what is cringey?
Click to expand...

No I don't. She's 16. Which is why her speech sucked and we need proper orators to address a serious issue. That's my point. her speech is good enough for claps or buzzfeed making a video
 
shamans said:
No I don't. She's 16. Which is why her speech sucked and we need proper orators to address a serious issue. That's my point. her speech is good enough for claps or buzzfeed making a video
Click to expand...

Look what good orators accomplished in awareness and look what she accomplished on that regards and then tell me again what we need
 
4bars said:
No
Click to expand...

Yes. Internet is full of it. No ssne person who didnt care about climate change before cares now.

No country will pass a law because of this. This speech just annoyed a lot of people .

It will be great for her career though when she runs for a political job in 4 or 5 years
 
shamans said:
Yes. Internet is full of it. No ssne person who didnt care about climate change before cares now.

No country will pass a law because of this. This speech just annoyed a lot of people .

It will be great for her career though when she runs for a political job in 4 or 5 years
Click to expand...

And that shows how wrong you are and how biased you are for I don't know what kind of head towards her

If a country doesn't pass a law is not for her is because they had not being doing anything ever, only good words. Now you will tell me that US left the Paris agreement because of her.

Time is well past for action, and angry people like her sure appear more and more because the traditional way doesn't work. Her way might leed to nothing, but I can guarantee that for the people of her generation, the one you don't belong and probably don't understand, she is a referent and created the necesseraly awareness for them to try to find a solution that our generation(s) failed to provide

You are to cynical to see that she is doing that because she belives in it and if she chose to be a politician, will be a means to get her goals not that this are the means to her goal to be a politician
 
4bars said:
And that shows how wrong you are and how biased you are for I don't know what kind of head towards her

If a country doesn't pass a law is not for her is because they had not being doing anything ever, only good words. Now you will tell me that US left the Paris agreement because of her.

Time is well past for action, and angry people like her sure appear more and more because the traditional way doesn't work. Her way might leed to nothing, but I can guarantee that for the people of her generation, the one you don't belong and probably don't understand, she is a referent and created the necesseraly awareness for them to try to find a solution that our generation(s) failed to provide

You are to cynical to see that she is doing that because she belives in it and if she chose to be a politician, will be a means to get her goals not that this are the means to her goal to be a politician
Click to expand...

No but they sure as hell wont be joining because of this speech either.

This idea of new generation being mad at the current one is nothing new. Not to mention, I'm not all the older from -- it's not like she's my child's age.

You're calling my a cynic, and I can easily call you naive. Naive enough to believe speeches like this have a positive impact and that she wont benefit massively from this publicity. Naive enough to believe a girl from a privileged white Swedish artistic family will positively impact anything from this speech.

If a pictures of dead children from Syria and Yemen can't solve anything nor is this girl. It was a cliched speech met with golf claps from politicians.

How about you pay attention to people who could ACTUALLY make a difference regarding climate change like Andrew Yang.
 
Votes are what will make politicians act. If engaging a generation of people in this issue at a young age (which she has done) and the backwards reaching influence that has on that generation's parents (something we have seen on other social issues) threatens to carry into potential votes then she will have a positive impact. That's a pretty low and broad standard to be arguing against.

In Ireland we recently saw plans announced to plant a ridiculous amount of trees in response to climate change, not-so-coincidentally at a time when the Green party was attracting support politically. Thunberg's campaign only makes it more likely that potential voters will be inclined to look for climate change policies from their politicians.
 
shamans said:
No but they sure as hell wont be joining because of this speech either.

This idea of new generation being mad at the current one is nothing new. Not to mention, I'm not all the older from -- it's not like she's my child's age.

You're calling my a cynic, and I can easily call you naive. Naive enough to believe speeches like this have a positive impact and that she wont benefit massively from this publicity. Naive enough to believe a girl from a privileged white Swedish artistic family will positively impact anything from this speech.

If a pictures of dead children from Syria and Yemen can't solve anything nor is this girl. It was a cliched speech met with golf claps from politicians.

How about you pay attention to people who could ACTUALLY make a difference regarding climate change like Andrew Yang.
Click to expand...

Ok, When another country leaved the Paris agreement bump it and will discuss the causes

I am a cynical person, a lot, but you have hatred problems. Now it results that white people can't be angry to a global problem that will affect to everyone . So white people should shut up? Are you telling me to shut up? who is most likely to have more knowledge about an issue? a well educated person from a developed world or an analphabet form a country to be developed? lets give the reigns to a uneducated and analphabet people on climate change then, just to be PC and because they are brown. The stupidity of that sentence!!

You know? I pay attention at activist and researchers, fortunately I don't need to focus on just one person or ow you would be the center of my universe so don't be flattered
 
sullydnl said:
Votes are what will make politicians act. If engaging a generation of people in this issue at a young age (which she has done) and the backwards reaching influence that has on that generations parents' (something we have seen on other social issues) threatens to carry into potential votes then she will have a positive impact. That's a pretty low and broad standard to be arguing against.

In Ireland we recently saw plans announced to plant a ridiculous amount of trees in response to climate change, not-so-coincidentally at a time when the Green party was attracting support politically. Thunberg's campaign only makes it more likely that potential voters will be inclined to look for climate change policies from their politicians.
Click to expand...


Okay, how come a child never gives a speech on issues like Iran-U.S war or England leaving the EU? They're not allowed. Those things ACTUALLY MATTER to organizations. They would never let a child give a speech like this.

Why climate change? Because organization like U.N couldn't give a feck. It's like that "bonus portion" of a segment where you bring on a young child to throw a bone to the audience with the whole "oh how brave! Next generation is FIGHTING for climate change! Awesome", politicians will clap and now let's move on to more serious business.

This is my problem with this. Climate change is a SERIOUS issue and these "aw brave girl" bonus segments are actually making LIGHT of the issue. Its like bringing on the kids for the league cup group stage. This should be treated like the fecking champions league semi final.

But no one is willing to see this. All of you supporting this are falling RIGHT into the trap of organizations like the U.N. A little bit of glitter, a dedicated young girl and a stage is all you guys need to feel content about climate change.

It's putting a paper over the crack so you feel work's being done when the rot is getting worse on the inside.

@4bars , yes I have HATE. Hate towards all attempts to make the issue of global warming a bonus portion of the main fecking show.
 
4bars said:
Ok, When another country leaved the Paris agreement bump it and will discuss the causes

I am a cynical person, a lot, but you have hatred problems. Now it results that white people can't be angry to a global problem that will affect to everyone . So white people should shut up? Are you telling me to shut up? who is most likely to have more knowledge about an issue? a well educated person from a developed world or an analphabet form a country to be developed? lets give the reigns to a uneducated and analphabet people on climate change then, just to be PC and because they are brown. The stupidity of that sentence!!

You know? I pay attention at activist and researchers, fortunately I don't need to focus on just one person or ow you would be the center of my universe so don't be flattered
Click to expand...

Of course you knew I didn't mean that but you're just trying to be instigative here so I'm not going to reply. If it makes it easier for you understand it's about this sheltered girl giving a speech of this nature. No wonder it was a terrible speech.
 
shamans said:
Okay, how come a child never gives a speech on issues like Iran-U.S war or England leaving the EU? They're not allowed. Those things ACTUALLY MATTER to organizations. They would never let a child give a speech like this.

Why climate change? Because organization like U.N couldn't give a feck. It's like that "bonus portion" of a segment where you bring on a young child to throw a bone to the audience with the whole "oh how brave! Next generation is FIGHTING for climate change! Awesome", politicians will clap and now let's move on to more serious business.

This is my problem with this. Climate change is a SERIOUS issue and these "aw brave girl" bonus segments are actually making LIGHT of the issue. Its like bringing on the kids for the league cup group stage. This should be treated like the fecking champions league semi final.

But no one is willing to see this. All of you supporting this are falling RIGHT into the trap of organizations like the U.N. A little bit of glitter, a dedicated young girl and a stage is all you guys need to feel content about climate change.

It's putting a paper over the crack so you feel work's being done when the rot is getting worse on the inside.
Click to expand...

You KNOW there are OTHER ways to DEMONSTRATE emphasis in TEXT. Perhaps TRY using BOLD or underline or even ITALICS every once in a WHILE
 
Climate change is just a sales pitch isn't it? If the corps bought into it, wouldn't they be shifting their fat arses first but it's always the little man they gotta convince. :) Don't worry. When the world goes to crap, these promoters of fear will be giving themselves bonuses :)
 
sullydnl said:
Votes are what will make politicians act. If engaging a generation of people in this issue at a young age (which she has done) and the backwards reaching influence that has on that generation's parents (something we have seen on other social issues) threatens to carry into potential votes then she will have a positive impact. That's a pretty low and broad standard to be arguing against.

In Ireland we recently saw plans announced to plant a ridiculous amount of trees in response to climate change, not-so-coincidentally at a time when the Green party was attracting support politically. Thunberg's campaign only makes it more likely that potential voters will be inclined to look for climate change policies from their politicians.
Click to expand...
Really? I'm always surprised how low quality voting is in 1st world countrie, opposed to being non-existent or tampered with at most 3rd world countries, it's better but not by much.
 
shamans said:
Of course you knew I didn't mean that but you're just trying to be instigative here so I'm not going to reply. If it makes it easier for you understand it's about this sheltered girl giving a speech of this nature. No wonder it was a terrible speech.
Click to expand...

Oh, you totally meant that. You meant that for the fact of being of a certain race has not right to do what she does. The same bullshittery that communist can't have cellphones. Be pure and bright and consequent. To be worth it you need to be brown, vegan, dress in hemp, be 16 and speak like a seasoned politcian and be perfect without cracks

The reality is that she accomplished with 16 what you will never accomplished in positive impact and you are bickering for that speech. ridiculous
 
4bars said:
Oh, you totally meant that. You meant that for the fact of being of a certain race has not right to do what she does. The same bullshittery that communist can't have cellphones. Be pure and bright and consequent. To be worth it you need to be brown, vegan, dress in hemp, be 16 and speak like a seasoned politcian and be perfect without cracks

The reality is that she accomplished with 16 what you will never accomplished in positive impact and you are bickering for that speech. ridiculous
Click to expand...

You're bringing race into it.

Yeah she obviously accomplished more than I ever could. She's paving herself a golden career in politics so she certainly knows how to carve out a career.
 
4bars said:
Oh, you totally meant that. You meant that for the fact of being of a certain race has not right to do what she does. The same bullshittery that communist can't have cellphones. Be pure and bright and consequent. To be worth it you need to be brown, vegan, dress in hemp, be 16 and speak like a seasoned politcian and be perfect without cracks

The reality is that she accomplished with 16 what you will never accomplished in positive impact and you are bickering for that speech. ridiculous
Click to expand...
Hey I'll do you 1 better, the probability of a white privileged girl making some small difference is much higher than brown/black kids, because the world actually cares.
 
shamans said:
You're bringing race into it.

Yeah she obviously accomplished more than I ever could. She's paving herself a golden career in politics so she certainly knows how to carve out a career.
Click to expand...

You brought it with the white swedish. At least don't lie. She is not good enough for you and she has no right because she is white
 
You must log in or register to reply here.