Saving the planet / IPCC report on Climate Change Aug ‘21

Simonh

And all of this should be 100% supported and encouraged - it is simple common sense in many ways.

Sustainability, buying once and using for a long time and all those sorts of initiatives make a great deal of sense for the environment. 

ThePrettyDamned

Simonh said:

that rather depends on if the 999 doctors all had funding from the same big pharma...

what a ridiculous strawman that is!

and yeah - no money in climate change at all...

https://climatefundsupdate.org/the-funds/

That's... Seriously... Not as much money as you might think it is.

For reference, only two of those funds are above USD 1bn. There are individual humans worth more than entire collective funds, that need to be distributed to project teams globally.

This money covers research, innovation, action, comms and capacity building. Remember, there are individuals with a net worth higher than some of these funds combined.

It's a lot less money than you think. A lot of private companies are worth significantly more, into the hundreds of billions of dollars. If you sum all of those climate funds, I'd guess it's worth less than Apple, or Amazon, or Microsoft. 

Edit: it's why most of the work is in the not-for-profit sector. Trust me, we ain't raking it in! 

ThePrettyDamned

Simonh said:

And all of this should be 100% supported and encouraged - it is simple common sense in many ways.

Sustainability, buying once and using for a long time and all those sorts of initiatives make a great deal of sense for the environment. 

Absolutely true!

I hate throwaway culture. I know people who buy outfits that are basically designed to fall apart - they're for one night out, then disposed. It's hugely wasteful, drains water, food and fuels/energy for... Well, nothing really.

Contrast with, say, a well made pair of shoes. They'll last a long time and be repairable. The impact is significantly lessened.

See also peat compost vs peat-free. I have no idea why peat compost is still legal (or not taxed up the wazoo ten times over at least). Peat bogs are one of the most important carbon sinks on the planet, and we use it for pot plants and kid ourselves we're doing the environment some good by having a houseplant. It's mad. 

Simonh

so your point is that because there is more money existing in other parts of the global economy that it isn't a lot of money?

lets look at it another way, all of the climate funding available is available for proving how bad man made climate change is, by comparison how much funding is available for proving the opposite?

And again - I am not saying that we shouldn't be funding research into the climate but that research should be balanced and objective not in pursuit of a pre-determined outcome.

Hottubes

Simonh said:

And all of this should be 100% supported and encouraged - it is simple common sense in many ways.

Sustainability, buying once and using for a long time and all those sorts of initiatives make a great deal of sense for the environment. 

Totally agree, built in obsolescence needs be routed out, but not much chance of that happening whilst people want cheap goods from China.

That's why i play 60's fender amps and not a Boss fecking Katana. lol

TTony

Why is it that, no matter what the topic,   there's always someone?

monquixote

Simonh said:

lets look at it another way, all of the climate funding available is available for proving how bad man made climate change is, by comparison how much funding is available for proving the opposite?

Lots and lots:  https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/mar/22/top-oil-firms-spending-millions-lobbying-to-block-climate-change-policies-says-report

Also who do you think paid to hack UAE in Climategate?

Not to mention the governments and policymakers in any country or state that benefits from extracting or using large amounts of coal or oil.

Bridgehouse

Here’s something for you to muse on whilst surfing the fretboard tonight.

How many of you set your domestic broadband router to switch off overnight?

Not worth it? 

Well, the average router consumes about 70Kwh/annum. Let’s assume you switched it off for a third of the average 24hr day overnight. That’s 23.3kwh per annum saved. On average 1kwh generates 300g of carbon equivalent. So, that’s 7kg of carbon per annum saved. 

If every regular fretboarder did that, then that’s 7 tonnes of carbon per year saved. If every U.K. household did it, it’s about 70,000 tonnes per annum saved. And that’s just one simple change that makes absolutely fuck all difference to most. Oh, and you’ve probably saved yourself an average of a fiver a year in electricity. 

menamestom

Simonh said:

PANIC MR MANNERING!!!

I find it amazing that all the climate scientist who have a vested interest in being right and not having their models questioned in any way shape or form continue to find that they are right and any dissenting science or scientific opinion is pure conspiracy theory and 100% certainly not right as they have the science "settled"

Long may the funding continue...

Who are the dissenting scientists, I thought it was almost universally accepted that the world warming was increasing due to man made factors.  No doubt there are arguments about the speed and impact of these factors but I would have thought nearly all agree on the general trend.

Would be interesting to hear about some of the main opponents to this.

I'm not a climatologist but in other fields the opponents to the weight of mainstream scientific consensus often have their own vested interests in promoting their own view just as much - Youtube channel, website selling alternative medicines etc. 

Would be interesting to analyse a few case studies of dissenting voices that might really be on to something.  

Greatape

Also https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/tobacco-and-oil-industries-used-same-researchers-to-sway-public1/


..but this is old news, right?

Kilgore

Increasing drought conditions has nothing to do with climate change. It's because all the water is falling off the edge. 

Simonh

monquixote said:

Simonh said:

lets look at it another way, all of the climate funding available is available for proving how bad man made climate change is, by comparison how much funding is available for proving the opposite?

Lots and lots:  https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/mar/22/top-oil-firms-spending-millions-lobbying-to-block-climate-change-policies-says-report

Also who do you think paid to hack UAE in Climategate?

Not to mention the governments and policymakers in any country or state that benefits from extracting or using large amounts of coal or oil.

$200m sure is a lot, but is about the same as just the bottom 4 sources I linked to earlier, the top funding source alone in that list was $10322m, the top 4 amount to $27307m so I am not sure it is an apples for apples comparison.

I am not saying climate change does not exist, I am saying we should not just implicitly trust what climate scientist say, if you have a problem with the application of any level of critical thinking then there is nothing more I can say.

horse

Kilgore said:

Increasing drought conditions has nothing to do with climate change. It's because all the water is falling off the edge. 

Yeah, and how can there be a drought when it's been raining so much anyway?

Hottubes

Bridgehouse said:

Here’s something for you to muse on whilst surfing the fretboard tonight.

How many of you set your domestic broadband router to switch off overnight?

Not worth it? 

Well, the average router consumes about 70Kwh/annum. Let’s assume you switched it off for a third of the average 24hr day overnight. That’s 23.3kwh per annum saved. On average 1kwh generates 300g of carbon equivalent. So, that’s 7kg of carbon per annum saved. 

If every regular fretboarder did that, then that’s 7 tonnes of carbon per year saved. If every U.K. household did it, it’s about 70,000 tonnes per annum saved. And that’s just one simple change that makes absolutely fuck all difference to most. Oh, and you’ve probably saved yourself an average of a fiver a year in electricity. 

Every time. Seriously !!

WiresDreamDisasters

ICBM said:

WiresDreamDisasters said:

I don't support zero growth, and never will. Zero growth is literally a pathway to global famine and death and destruction.

We don't have a population growth problem. We're not making enough people, full stop. What we have is a distribution problem, and a hoarding problem.

I don't agree with all of that. It's true that we no longer have a serious population growth problem - the rate of increase is falling drastically, and peak human population has been predicted - it may occur within both our lifetimes (mine only just if I live a very long one). And it's certainly true that the biggest problem is distribution - of all resources - not population.

But that doesn't mean we need *more* people. The projected peak of around 10 to 11 billion is at the upper end of what is truly sustainable, and if it stabilises there or very slowly falls, that will not be a bad thing. We still have to raise 90% of the population out of their relative poverty and to something approaching current Western standards, which will increase resource use per head again, so you will still have economic growth for a very long time - but even that cannot continue literally indefinitely. The Earth is a finite size.

Unless we really have started to colonise the other planets by then, possibly.

Okay, let me rephrase. We need more Elon Musk's and Drew Vernon's and ICBM's, and fewer Emp_Fab's

ronnyb

Bridgehouse said:

Here’s something for you to muse on whilst surfing the fretboard tonight.

How many of you set your domestic broadband router to switch off overnight?

Not worth it? 

Well, the average router consumes about 70Kwh/annum. Let’s assume you switched it off for a third of the average 24hr day overnight. That’s 23.3kwh per annum saved. On average 1kwh generates 300g of carbon equivalent. So, that’s 7kg of carbon per annum saved. 

If every regular fretboarder did that, then that’s 7 tonnes of carbon per year saved. If every U.K. household did it, it’s about 70,000 tonnes per annum saved. And that’s just one simple change that makes absolutely fuck all difference to most. Oh, and you’ve probably saved yourself an average of a fiver a year in electricity. 

I used to. I was having a lot of disconnection problems with my broadband and the provider told me that it was because i was switching the router off at night.

Bridgehouse

ronnyb said:

Bridgehouse said:

Here’s something for you to muse on whilst surfing the fretboard tonight.

How many of you set your domestic broadband router to switch off overnight?

Not worth it? 

Well, the average router consumes about 70Kwh/annum. Let’s assume you switched it off for a third of the average 24hr day overnight. That’s 23.3kwh per annum saved. On average 1kwh generates 300g of carbon equivalent. So, that’s 7kg of carbon per annum saved. 

If every regular fretboarder did that, then that’s 7 tonnes of carbon per year saved. If every U.K. household did it, it’s about 70,000 tonnes per annum saved. And that’s just one simple change that makes absolutely fuck all difference to most. Oh, and you’ve probably saved yourself an average of a fiver a year in electricity. 

I used to. I was having a lot of disconnection problems with my broadband and the provider told me that it was because i was switching the router off at night.

That sounds like a support person fobbing you off… a lot of them even have a setting to do it!

For router you could also read Sky Box, console, Amazon echo, whatever really.. we leave an awful lot of stuff on at home when asleep, or when we go on holiday etc.

It’s similar to changing the dial on your fridge or freezer by a few digits, or setting the heating a few degrees cooler.

ronnyb

But I’ve had no problems since I’ve left it on.

menamestom

Bridgehouse said:

How many of you set your domestic broadband router to switch off overnight?

We turn ours off as a measure (among others) to stop the kids staying up all night watching things.   I use a smart plug so it's at a certain time and I don't forget.

I've not checked but hopefully the smart plug doesn't use the power saved by switching the router off, I probably should check!

jpfamps

Bridgehouse said:

Here’s something for you to muse on whilst surfing the fretboard tonight.

How many of you set your domestic broadband router to switch off overnight?

Not worth it? 

Well, the average router consumes about 70Kwh/annum. Let’s assume you switched it off for a third of the average 24hr day overnight. That’s 23.3kwh per annum saved. On average 1kwh generates 300g of carbon equivalent. So, that’s 7kg of carbon per annum saved. 

If every regular fretboarder did that, then that’s 7 tonnes of carbon per year saved. If every U.K. household did it, it’s about 70,000 tonnes per annum saved. And that’s just one simple change that makes absolutely fuck all difference to most. Oh, and you’ve probably saved yourself an average of a fiver a year in electricity. 

Don't have the internet at home!