COP26: All talk or some real action on climate change?

[BoldonLad]

Photovoltaics.
Solar energy.

Sorry this is far more complicatef than for anyone to go

"I repeat" and expect your 'demands' to be met..

If it was that easy , this would have been sorted out years ago, I could have retired from my life of 'middle aged activism' and be spending all my free time on going for nice bike rides.. .

The solutions are far more complex, and less absolutist than that.

However I commend your energy, drive, and committment.

Great to have you onboard, yes the worst polluters (and the richest countries) have an obligation to do the most.

Now go tell the 'others' ..

Thanks (for the PV = Solar Power).

They are not demands, simply an observation that if you wish to make a large (absolute) reduction in emissions, then, it would seem sensible to "go for" the big emitters (in absolute terms) first.

 

[mudsticks]

They are not demands, simply an observation that if you wish to make a large (absolute) reduction in emissions, then, it would seem sensible to "go for" the big emitters (in absolute terms) first.

It seems indisputably sensible you're right.

Unfortunately geo politics is a 'bit' more complicated than that..

If only the sensible people were in charge right.?

Not the self interested egotistical short termist capitalists..

 

[Rusty Nails]

Bigger countries should do more?? That seems ludicrous.
If you wanted to start a hugely profitable, hugely polluting industry, build your factories in Luxembourg??
If scotland get independence, can they start pointing fingers at every bigger nation??
Madness
Pollution-per-person seems the only rational way to run a planet.

But if you have yer average Chinese or Indian is living off one lump of coal per day and westerners living off 10 lumps of coal a day...who should be making the most effort? I appreciate it's a numbers game, but it's also how those numbers are distributed. We are the profligate coal/energy users, not the Chinese or Indians...it just so happens there are a lot of them which skews the data.

Between them China and India have over 1/3 of the World's population. The World cannot wait for them to catch up to the West's per capita fossil fuel usage or for the West to reduce its per capita usage to their level, given the huge discrepancies of development/living standards across those two nations.

It is a nice hair-shirt solution that will fit in to the "West is bad" guilt trip but in reality is so unlikely to happen that it will be too little, too late to stop temperatures rising by above the 2° level.

Yes we should be able to do a lot better than we are doing currently, even though we have been improving, but that does not let the major national polluters off the hook.

 

[matticus]

Thanks (for the PV = Solar Power).

They are not demands, simply an observation that if you wish to make a large (absolute) reduction in emissions, then, it would seem sensible to "go for" the big emitters (in absolute terms) first.

If you could click your fingers and make things magically happen, then yes, I agree that the largest absolute reductions would be the ones to go for.

 

[BoldonLad]

If you could click your fingers and make things magically happen, then yes, I agree that the largest absolute reductions would be the ones to go for.

As I have already said, at least once, “I never said it would be easy”

Don’t want to sound like a victim, but… one other poster is saying pretty much the same as me, but, with zero replies. I know I am a likeable old git, but, being Mr (un?)Popular is making me blush.

 

[matticus]

As I have already said, at least once, “I never said it would be easy”

We don't necessarily need EASY - but we do need something in the next few years!

Don’t want to sound like a victim, but… one other poster is saying pretty much the same as me, but, with zero replies. I know I am a likeable old git, but, being Mr (un?)Popular is making me blush.

In the old place, when that happened I assumed it was cos t'other bloke was on everyone's Ignore List ! So please assume that you're simply far more interesting/nice a person to debate with.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

I think it’s pretty clear where we need to go. We have the means. What we lack is the will….

What we lack is a clear goal, the correct questions and the correct answers. Cop26 only gave a vague goal and even vaguer ways to get to that goal. Which will result in normal people paying for good intentions that lead to nowhere.
Yes we might ban fossil fuels and maybe on the longer term even coal, what's the use if you replace it with something that is in about 10-50 years just as much of a problem?
What's the use of saving the nature of the nature gets killed by the solar wind farms, due to low noise and birds being hit by the blades?
Lastly for now, why do we keep on killing forest and call it green because it's so called bio-mass?

 

[BoldonLad]

We don't necessarily need EASY - but we do need something in the next few years!



In the old place, when that happened I assumed it was cos t'other bloke was on everyone's Ignore List ! So please assume that you're simply far more interesting/nice a person to debate with.

I will PM you my phone number

 

[mjr]

What's the use of saving the nature of the nature gets killed by the solar wind farms, due to low noise and birds being hit by the blades?

Yes, windmill blades kill birds. That's why there are no birds in the Netherlands. All killed by the notorious windmills in that country.

 

[dutchguylivingintheuk]

Yes, windmill blades kill birds. That's why there are no birds in the Netherlands. All killed by the notorious windmills in that country.

I was talking about solar wind farms not windmills that's a big difference, you also choose to pick and mix one thing out of it to make it sound silly.
But low noise sound and the effect of those gigantic solar wind farms on wildlife are an scarcely reported issue that should be looked into more.

 

[mjr]

I was talking about solar wind farms not windmills that's a big difference,

Which is...?

I'm not making it sound silly. It just does.

 

[matticus]

Are "solar wind farms" any different to the "wind farms" that we normally talk about? i.e. a large-ish area covered with 10metre+ white turbines, of which there are now hundreds across the UK?

 

[FishFright]

Thanks (for the PV = Solar Power).

They are not demands, simply an observation that if you wish to make a large (absolute) reduction in emissions, then, it would seem sensible to "go for" the big emitters (in absolute terms) first.

To me it's not one or the other group that needs to reduce emissions it's every group and now. To do otherwise is pure folly.

 

[Fab Foodie]

To me it's not one or the other group that needs to reduce emissions it's every group and now. To do otherwise is pure folly.

Agreed. And for a Chinaman/Indian living off 1 lump of coal a day to survive, it's much more difficult than for a Westerner on 10 lumps of coal a day. However committed you are to ask Chinese and Indians to reduce their coal use is a very big ask....

 

[BoldonLad]

To me it's not one or the other group that needs to reduce emissions it's every group and now. To do otherwise is pure folly.

Yes. No harm in everyone doing their bit.