Climate Crisis: Are we doing enough?

[BoldonLad]

Er ... surely that's an It Depends thing?!? Population increase at 5%/annum, CO2/head decreased at 6%/annum, all is good.
Opposite way round => bad !

We know that average USAnian uses 100s of times the resources of the average world citizen in 1922; so it is certainly possible to reverse our current trend. We just need the will - or perhaps more importantly, the leadership.

My point is, even if consumption levels were harmonised across the globe, no matter. what the level of consumption/pollution by individual humans, then, a smaller population will consume/pollute less, than a larger population.

I agree, there are multiple strands to the solution. IMHO, it is not simply a case of saying drive fewer miles/reduce air travel etc etc, but, surely, the sheer number of us has a bearing on how sustainable the situation is? Even if we all went back to stagnate levels of consumption, but, population growth continued at current levels, then, it would, eventually, become unsustainable, if, resources are finite.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Excellent

As far as I'm aware the same building regs regarding insulation, are applied nationally.

They've just been ramped up in the last year or so.

Although desirable, solar installations are not mandatory, but the sustainability of heating systems is scrutinised.

It seems from talking to people who already have these super insulated houses, that they barely need to put the heating on anyway.


With climate change already showing its teeth here, it's going to be necessary to think seriously about some windows also having shutters to keep the extreme summertime heat out.

Funny you should mention shutters, the August heat when we moved-in has me contemplating shutters.
The house also has a system by which incoming air is pre-warmed in some way through the loft. I've not red the blurb yet.
Anyhow, super cosy. From an eco standpoint the Woodburner let's us down....

 

[Wobblers]

Does the fact that there are a lot of us, and, that too is increasing exponentially, have bearing on the problem?

As always, a moment of thought might just help here. You use considerably more energy than someone a century ago. And they in turn used more energy than someone in the industrial revolution. Per capita energy use has been increasing since before the industrial revolution.

Energy demand is doubling every 30 years. Population has been doubling every 50 years. Note that I've said has been, because the rate of increase is slowing. The principle drivers of that are increased wealth and improved education for girls.

In short, the problem is not too many people. We've got enough resources to feed, clothe and house all 8 billion of us in comfort. The problem is that 10% of the global population consume close to 80% of the availabe resources. That's you and I, just to be clear. Get rid of the Western world and the rest of the planet would get along just fine. In other words, the problem is too many happy shoppers.

 

[BoldonLad]

As always, a moment of thought might just help here. You use considerably more energy than someone a century ago. And they in turn used more energy than someone in the industrial revolution. Per capita energy use has been increasing since before the industrial revolution.

Energy demand is doubling every 30 years. Population has been doubling every 50 years. Note that I've said has been, because the rate of increase is slowing. The principle drivers of that are increased wealth and improved education for girls.

In short, the problem is not too many people. We've got enough resources to feed, clothe and house all 8 billion of us in comfort. The problem is that 10% of the global population consume close to 80% of the availabe resources. That's you and I, just to be clear. Get rid of the Western world and the rest of the planet would get along just fine. In other words, the problem is too many happy shoppers.

So, if those 10% wind their energy consumption down, to the level of the existing 90% (highly unlikely), but, population doubles in let us say 100 years, then, we are still using more resources than if the 10% wind their energy consumption down to the level of the existing 90% and population levels remain static.

 

[Fab Foodie]

So, if those 10% wind their energy consumption down, to the level of the existing 90% (highly unlikely), but, population doubles in let us say 100 years, then, we are still using more resources than if the 10% wind their energy consumption down to the level of the existing 90% and population levels remain static.

...then take away the number you first thought off, multiply by your shoe size in metric and deduct your age....

 

[BoldonLad]

...then take away the number you first thought off, multiply by your shoe size in metric and deduct your age....

Or, engage sensibly, and, accept that x people consuming a given level (z) of resources, will consume fewer resources than x+y people. consuming a given level of resources (z), provided that x, y and z are positive integers.

We could even blame the Tories, given Boris's reproductive spree, does that help?

 

[slowmotion]

As always, a moment of thought might just help here. You use considerably more energy than someone a century ago. And they in turn used more energy than someone in the industrial revolution. Per capita energy use has been increasing since before the industrial revolution.

Energy demand is doubling every 30 years. Population has been doubling every 50 years. Note that I've said has been, because the rate of increase is slowing. The principle drivers of that are increased wealth and improved education for girls.

In short, the problem is not too many people. We've got enough resources to feed, clothe and house all 8 billion of us in comfort. The problem is that 10% of the global population consume close to 80% of the availabe resources. That's you and I, just to be clear. Get rid of the Western world and the rest of the planet would get along just fine. In other words, the problem is too many happy shoppers.

Isn't the problem also that 90% of the population understandably aspire to having lifestyles like that of the resources-greedy existing ten percent. It's going to be hard to explain to somebody in the developing World "Sorry pal, you can't live like we do/did".

 

[albion]

It is a whole spectrum of aspirations.
You have maybe aspiring to own a bicycle, then aspiring to own an electric bike, then a motorbike, then a car, and for the few, a jet.

And they all need infrastructure.

 

[MrGrumpy]

View: https://twitter.com/juststop_oil/status/1604471604238598146?s=46&t=dsTLt2NuvwCR4SOIIGV6MA


The tree huggers back in action !

 

[albion]

https://amp.theguardian.com/environ...s-road-transport-uk-government-blocks-release

Two fingers raised to health and climate.

 

[Fab Foodie]

Or, engage sensibly, and, accept that x people consuming a given level (z) of resources, will consume fewer resources than x+y people. consuming a given level of resources (z), provided that x, y and z are positive integers.

We could even blame the Tories, given Boris's reproductive spree, does that help?

No not really....
That would be a gross oversimplification.

 

[albion]

View: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/av/business-63910430

'As some shoppers swap mains bulbs for battery lights, is money really being saved?'

The fact that it even gets discussed is pretty scary.

 

[albion]

https://www.walesonline.co.uk/news/cost-of-living/air-source-heat-pump-costs-25803172.amp

I imagine that, compared to ground source heat extraction, these are nearing 100% uselessness in winter.

 

[slowmotion]

Candles give a more pleasant light.

 

[matticus]

Candles give a more pleasant light.

Depends whose fat you make them from.