Global Warming
- Started
- Last post
- 643 Responses
- Khurram0
raf said: "b. produces unhealthy, unnatural type of light,
c. is only more efficient under certain conditions?"more elaboration on such wild statements, please.
- If you can't even be bothered to do your own research then you are not worthy of any respect in a debateset
- I've heard a lot about CFLs, never that they can be less efficient than incandescent.joeth
- They are more efficient in long intervals, but take more energy when starting up, up to 40 minutes.raf
- ie. in a bathroom: you come in, light on, take a dump, light off – this light bulb took more power than incandescentraf
- set, shhhhh! grown-ups are talking.Khurram
- Khurram0
raf said: "CFL... produce ugly-coloured, unhealthy type of light (attributed to many medical conditions). "
Eh, care to elaborate?
- lowimpakt0
ian - you keep talking about "we" then presenting the most insulting slovenly type of person you can.
It's more complicated than people being stupid or lazy and it is more complicated that "people getting together"
even the principle of "efficiency" is often flawed. have you heard of the rebound effect?
you're not going to get people to listen yo you if you sound like a smug bastard.
- Fair point. It's easy to generalise. Just reading about the rebound effect. Interesting,Ianbolton
- Ianbolton0
Admit it guys, as a human race, we're greedy enough to destroy our own planet to make money. All we want is to sit on our greedy fat arses, eat ready meals, take everything we have for granted, and then when it's gone, we feel a bit more lost in our pointless useless lives.
The fact we still have fascinations with man-made cities like Dubai which has literally no solar panels whatsoever, in a desert, with sun throughout the year, is absolutely ridiculous. Dubai makes so much money through oil it buys all the things it needs. We want everything bigger, more powerful, more destructive to the planet. How stupid is that?Why do we give a shit, when it's obvious that nobody is going to do anything about it?
Well in fact they are doing things. We have government protected forests and park, we have sustainable tree farms for our paper, we have localised fish farms to help replenish the 3/4 depleted oceans, we have wind farms (which people complain about because they look ugly!), we have solar farms, we have countries who don't allow driving on particular days to encourage drive shares, encouraging community focus. We have so many things, due to government understanding and focus, which are allowing us to hopefully bring people together to work as a single human race towards a more efficient planet. It's not until we get together, and conquer our greed that we can begin to see any difference in the way we live our lives.
Right, I need to get the next local flight to work. Bye!
- Totally agree. People think short term in their daily lives, but can look long term when thinking policy.joeth
- Check out Masdar, a city being built in Abu Dhabi to run only on solar. http://en.wikipedia.…joeth
- lowimpakt0
"scientifically proven that every planet in our solar system is going through major changes and 'global warming' is happening on each and every one"
have you got peer reviewed papers that discuss this?
and maybe some evidence of the government conspiracy?
- set0
I haven't read the whole thread, but its now scientifically proven that every planet in our solar system is going through major changes and 'global warming' is happening on each and every one. As far as I am aware they don't drive SUV's on Mars. The government are just spreading fear to capitalise on a natural occurrence that is completely out of out control. I agree that we need to be more green and friendly to our planet but we are not causing global warming.
- lowimpakt0
ukit - you're point above about organisational leaverage is interesting.
I just checked something.
The UN has about 83,185 staff working across lots of different organisations such as UNICEF, UN Environment Programme, World Food Programme. Their remit is to resolve many of the worlds socio-political and environmental problems.
Mc Donald's has about 1.5 million staff and their role is to make people fat.
- bliznutty0
In a report titled “The First Global Revolution” (1991) published by the Club of Rome, a globalist think tank, we find the following statement:
“In searching for a new enemy to unite us, we came up with the idea that pollution, the threat of global warming, water shortages, famine and the like would fit the bill.... All these dangers are caused by human intervention... The real enemy, then, is humanity itself.”
- It doesn't take a genius to see that population increase and finite resources will change our way of life.joeth
- designbot0
ukit you always seem to bring oil companies and thier huge profits and power into this conversation. I'm not sure I get your angle....are you saying that the only reason there is any opposing force to man made global warming is becuase the oil companies have lots of power and put it towards misinforming the public?
- Well, it's proven to be an element of it...no denying thatukit
- raf0
- joeth0
Also... yes there's a lot of deception about 'green' products, but would you rather companies weren't trying to out-green each other?
It's good for consumers to be skeptical, but if we demand more transparency, the legit greener businesses will come through.
- ukit0
"Global Warming is and will continue to be an exploit used by large corporations to sell you crap"
You are probably right designbot, and bleeding heart hippie types who buy hemp arm bracelets piss me off almost as much as Republicans. On the other hand though think about this. In the computer/ design industry we bitch a lot about Microsoft dominating the market and stifling innovation, using monopolistic tendencies etc.
At the same time the current state of things, Microsoft's total dominance of the market, just means that everyone keeps funneling cash towards Bill Gates' shittastic enterprise so he can release more commercials of people holding house parties over the release of Windows 7. No one is predicting a rival to jump in and dethrone Windows anytime soon, even though it would probably be better for everyone.
Now imagine Microsoft, instead of revenue of $15 billion, had revenue of $400 billion (Exxon), $350 billion (Shell), or $200 billion (Chevron). Actually, if you look at the 10 most profitable public companies in the world, they are all oil companies, except for 3.
But that's actually deceptive because Exxon's profits are tiny in comparison to the state-owned oil companies of Saudi Arabia, Iran, Qatar, etc. In other words, socialism;)
It seems like a lot of people buy into the idea that governmental organizations like the U.N., Nobel Committee, Al Gore, are somehow to blame, but what the hell kind of leverage do they have compared to money like that?
You could talk about the Iraq War, or just pick a headline off today's news in the UK, where an oil trading firm actually succeeded in blocking the press from reporting on embarrassing news for a couple days.
- Total is at the bottom, but does not seem to be adding all up.
I do need sleep.raf
- Total is at the bottom, but does not seem to be adding all up.
- lowimpakt0
i agree raf - the answers to lots of the "problems" exist. the main barriers to change are social and political.
if it's so difficult to change a lightbulb how can we change the whole house :)
also - most of those low-carbon technologies are being developed with the support of the state (and they are also being hindered by the state)
- support through market development, R&D investment, risk capital, education etc etclowimpakt
- hindered through perverse incentives, bullshit demand side schemes, general lack of joined-up thinkinglowimpakt
- This is where I answer to your 'good night' trying hard not to draw the discussion further.
Good night :)raf - yess.. good night... 4 reallowimpakt
- raf0
"it has been done and there is nothing you can do about it"
Sneaky bastard, why didn't you start with it? You'd have saved all of us the whole evening!
- raf0
We are being taught that energy is scarce and the less we use, the better for the environment. Well.. it depends on the perspective.
Energy is abundant and free. You just need to reach for it. There are solar panels available to you that could easily power the computer you're reading this on.
Like I wrote before, people build energy-efficient solar powered houses which send energy back to the grid and make profit, even in countries with inbred solar deficit like the UK. If everyone built like that, it would turn the world upside down. We are on the verge of a revolution.
Coal plants will be extinct not because they're phased out by governments, but because alternative power technologies are being developed rapidly.It only takes small patches of land (or ocean) worth of panels to provide all the energy the world needs now.
It is a paradox, hence sounds absurd, but if we use more energy, the closer we get to infinite free energy sources.
[now I read that again, I do sound like a looney here ;) ]
- Coal is still very abundant and cheap. Also VERY dirty. It's not going away anytime soon.joeth
- Gov needs to help in selling energy back to grid.joeth
- in what way? forcing the grid to buy?raf
- Gov builds the infrastructure. The grid (at least in US) needs to be updated to make this possible.joeth
- http://www.denverpos…joeth
- designbot0
One last note: Global Warming is and will continue to be an exploit used by large corporations to sell you crap all in the name of being "green" or "environmentally friendly". Thinking you are doing your part by consuming such products or driving a green automobile is a farce.
End Thread.
- lowimpakt0
you're still ignoring the facts about the comparative scale of risk e.g. http://www.parliament.uk/commons…
i know ideologically you're opposed to the idea of state intervention and that this is due to complex socio-cultural and historical reasons but, after showing you the facts, all I can say is, tough, get over it, it has been done and there is nothing you can do about it.
as for batteries, the european commission have introduced a batteries directive which make battery producers financially responsible for the collection and safe disposal of used batteries. The intetion is that over time the market will full shift to more environmentally superior alternatives.
