Greta Thunberg - brave campaigner or deeply disturbed? Part II.

[The Don]

Thanks. Notably the winter peak is late afternoon/evening when solar can be discounted completely.

Fortunately there's usually plenty of wind at this time.

Even though I'm a leftie eco-weenie (at least by US standards), I'm also an advocate for the use of nuclear power - at least to provide baseload energy requirements.

If the UK had sufficient nuclear capacity to provide for at least 75% of winter baseload, it would allow for outages and maintenance on nuclear units whilst at the same time allowing for increasing use of renewables.

IMO the more important side of the equation is to reduce demand on grounds that it's likely permanent - and it saves money. Deindustrialisation has allowed the UK to significantly reduce energy consumption (or perhaps more accurately to offshore it to countries where they make things) but there's ample scope for individuals and businesses to make significant reductions.

 

[Stout]

What part of that do you find ideological rather than practical?

The part where she dumps in a bunch of ideological buzzwords that sound all revolutionary yet fails to give even a hint of what correcting this “So, we can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed. Everything needs to change and it has to start today.” world might look like. I mean, it's been years and we have yet to see any sort of manifesto.

Are we looking at something where we're all enriched by high tech like The Jetsons or are we looking at something along the lines of these highly valued Indigenous lifestyles where we live off the land in harmony with nature? What's the grand vision, Greta?

Cue John Lennon's Imagine, a 10 hour version. Everybody sway gently back and forth live the dream for half a day.

As things stand, 10% of the worlds population are responsible for ~70 of new emissions and up to 90% of the fossil CO2 that has already been emitted. Addressing this isn't ideology, rather it's something that any practical solution to climate change needs to address.

Being in that top 10% isn't all that difficult to attain in the developed world. Here's an article that claims you need under 100K USD net worth to be in that category. Are we talking about a massive, enforced, wealth redistribution scheme where anyone with over that amount will be forcibly stripped of it in the name of equity or is this some sort of call for the top 10% to reduce their emissions?

If it's the latter, then it's what I've been trying to sell throughout this entire thread rather than go with the pro-Thunberg approach of I want my government to make me reduce my emissions. Yes, I know game theory and all but somebody has to go first, right?

All to often however, people in developed countries either don't care or deny that they are the ones with the responsibility and resources to change first.

Agreed. Aware but don't care. Living your best possible life has a very strong allure. Climate vs lifestyle, the choice is yours.

 

[Darat]

And >>reset<<

 

[Chanakya]

(...) All to often however, people in developed countries either don't care or deny that they are the ones with the responsibility and resources to change first.

(...) Aware but don't care. Living your best possible life has a very strong allure. Climate vs lifestyle, the choice is yours.

And that completely callous indifference sums it all up.

And >>reset<<

Indeed.

 

[The Don]

And >>reset<<

What puzzles me is how upset those on the right get when you suggest that they might want to save themselves some money by taking the kinds of action that climate change activists are suggesting.

 

[Stout]

Other that ">>reset<<", anybody got a better explanation for this quote?

“So, we can’t save the world by playing by the rules, because the rules have to be changed. Everything needs to change and it has to start today.”

Link

 

[Stout]

What puzzles me is how upset those on the right get when you suggest that they might want to save themselves some money by taking the kinds of action that climate change activists are suggesting.

Do they really? I've never seen that except for, maybe, Insulate Britain and even then I've never seen any opposition to their ideas, just their road blocking tactics and the extra emissions that their causing all those vehicles to sit idling caused.

my next door neighbors, diehard liberals, you can tell by the progress pride flag outside their house insist on keeping their 2 people living in a 4 bedroom house with crappy single pane windows warm enough so they can walk around naked. Seriously.

Or let's take the World Cup. A totally liberal event for sure yet there were 500 flights/day arriving in Doha from around the world. Lifestyle and entertainment 1, Climate 0.


You can't just pin this on conservatives. Sure, you can try but they're wise to it.

 

[The Don]

Do they really?

Yes they do. They buy large, fuel inefficient ICE vehicles. Look at the furore about every attempt to introduce more efficient lightbulbs. They refuse to consider lifestyle changes that could significantly reduce their energy use and carbon footprint and attempt to block others from doing so as well.

 

[The Don]

I'm also not sure how you think the World Cup is liberal when you consider the average England football supporter of from which end of the political spectrum the criticism of the regime, the working conditions or indeed the majority of the anti FIFA rhetoric was coming from.

 

[Stout]

Yes they do. They buy large, fuel inefficient ICE vehicles. Look at the furore about every attempt to introduce more efficient lightbulbs. They refuse to consider lifestyle changes that could significantly reduce their energy use and carbon footprint and attempt to block others from doing so as well.

Americans, in other words. I know liberals who could do "better" in their vheicle choices, they're not driving monster trucks but still...

Given the amount of pride flag coverage we got WRT Worls Cup, there was most definitely a liberal slant to the event.

 

[lomiller]

Yes they do. They buy large, fuel inefficient ICE vehicles. Look at the furore about every attempt to introduce more efficient lightbulbs. They refuse to consider lifestyle changes that could significantly reduce their energy use and carbon footprint and attempt to block others from doing so as well.

And at a government level many cites are planed in such a way that you can't live there without a car, with no viable mass transit and long commutes to work and even long drives just to get groceries. Keeping a low carbon footprint in such a city is going to be all but impossible. So yeah rules around city planning need to change.

 

[Skeptical Greg]

What puzzles me is how upset those on the right get when you suggest that they might want to save themselves some money by taking the kinds of action that climate change activists are suggesting.

I suspect you aren't really puzzled..

Being interested in saving money would be a precursor to any interest in reducing their carbon footprint.

People who buy Hummers aren't interested in saving money..

If it matters, I doubt if they get upset over suggestions to the contrary.

 

[Roboramma]

I hate to be a wet blanket, but 2020 and 2021 would be expected outliers. Could the apparent "Peak" just be the impact of the pandemic? Is demand climbing back since then?

Could be, but I'd hope they take that into account in their analysis.

Mark me down as tentatively optimistic here.

 

[Roboramma]

And don't forget that is just peak demand for oil, we've not reached peak demand for other fuels such as natural gas.

Absolutely, though the shift from oil and coal to gas is definitely a good thing.

But to your general point, yes, some optimistic news certainly doesn't mean everything is great. Good doesn't equal perfect. And as others said it's probably worth it to check in again a year from now to see how these predictions line up with reality.

 

[angrysoba]

Or let's take the World Cup. A totally liberal event for sure yet there were 500 flights/day arriving in Doha from around the world. Lifestyle and entertainment 1, Climate 0.


You can't just pin this on conservatives. Sure, you can try but they're wise to it.

Dude, what?

Is there anyone who seriously considers the World Cup a "totally liberal event", unless it is some suggestion that only lefties play that kind of football?

FIFA is considered an extremely corrupt organization where their last two tournaments were held in Qatar and Russia. Two of the most illiberal societies in the world.

 

[Dr. Keith]

Soccer is a euro pansy liberal snow flake sport in god guns babies land of the lord’s true football, yeehaw! Pew, pew pew!

 

[ahhell]

Soccer is a euro pansy liberal snow flake sport in god guns babies land of the lord’s true football, yeehaw! Pew, pew pew!

Well, that's elucidative.

 

[The Don]

Americans, in other words.

Nope, the same is true when I look at, for example, the vehicle choices made my my friends and acquaintances here in the UK.

My left leaning friends tend to have small, fuel efficient, vehicles or - like Mrs Don - electric or plug in hybrid vehicles they charge from their solar and/or wind turbines.

My right leaning friends tend to have larger vehicles with, this being a rural area, a lot of Land-Rover and Range-Rover products despite not actually needing the 4x4 capability that they offer.

My left leaning friends have taken steps to reduce their carbon footprint by improving the thermal performance of their home, installing solar and/or a wind turbine, moving to more fuel-efficient heating systems like heat pumps (especially when combined with renewable energy) and avoiding waste wherever possible. My right leaning friends still run their AGAs every day of the year (which means opening the kitchen windows for several months a year because it's too hot), haven't taken any specific steps to change their energy usage (they're even trying to source incandescent and halogen bulbs rather than use LEDs) and simply complain about how expensive heating oil is.

 

[Lplus]

Nope, the same is true when I look at, for example, the vehicle choices made my my friends and acquaintances here in the UK.

My left leaning friends tend to have small, fuel efficient, vehicles or - like Mrs Don - electric or plug in hybrid vehicles they charge from their solar and/or wind turbines.

My right leaning friends tend to have larger vehicles with, this being a rural area, a lot of Land-Rover and Range-Rover products despite not actually needing the 4x4 capability that they offer.

My left leaning friends have taken steps to reduce their carbon footprint by improving the thermal performance of their home, installing solar and/or a wind turbine, moving to more fuel-efficient heating systems like heat pumps (especially when combined with renewable energy) and avoiding waste wherever possible. My right leaning friends still run their AGAs every day of the year (which means opening the kitchen windows for several months a year because it's too hot), haven't taken any specific steps to change their energy usage (they're even trying to source incandescent and halogen bulbs rather than use LEDs) and simply complain about how expensive heating oil is.

What sort of capital outlay have they made for that improvement? It's one thing to ask everyone to move to more efficient energy use, but another to exxpect the majority of the population to expend significant sums with no hope of a financial payback in even the medium term, never mind the short term.

edit - isn't this getting a little far from the thread topic?

 

[theprestige]

Dude, what?

Is there anyone who seriously considers the World Cup a "totally liberal event", unless it is some suggestion that only lefties play that kind of football?

FIFA is considered an extremely corrupt organization where their last two tournaments were held in Qatar and Russia. Two of the most illiberal societies in the world.

He said liberal, not sensible, responsible, or ethical.