Teddy Eagle
Member
- Country
Scotland
Better than a Charlton shirt.Wear a hair shirt I here they are environmentally friendly but itchy.
Better than a Charlton shirt.Wear a hair shirt I here they are environmentally friendly but itchy.
I do not think even a massive produced efficient CO2 sequestration machine would not be enough to reverse even the current rate of burning let alone the last 50 years of intense burning.As long as the gulf stream doesn't stop we are relatively protected this far to the northern hemisphere or have I got that wrong? It'll get like a rainy Spain.
Also, I think you're too down on technology being able to modify this. There are significant CO2 technologies that can be taken that could reduce warming....according to Grok by one or two degrees for just one of them.
I think it's too early to say it's over.
Renewable for me is sunlight or secondary energy from sunlight, such as wind and wave. Or anything that is considered part of a very short (max 2 year) carbon cycle.What do you class as renewable?
A lot of people do not even understand the process of what goes into the different methods that are classed as being cleaner.
I do not think even a massive produced efficient CO2 sequestration machine would not be enough to reverse even the current rate of burning let alone the last 50 years of intense burning.
The Atlantic conveyor is a theory, I'd be far more concerned about the gargantuan block of ice on Greenland melting, that's several metres of sea level
I was informed once that if the earth was shrunk to the size of a snooker ball it would be smoother than any manufactured. !
Do you vote?Several times. "We can't do anything as individuals".
You have probably max about another 50 years of burning before fusion and other energy sources take over the main roles. From that point the reversal system won't only have slowed increases they will be beating them back.
As for the melting.....'won't someone please think of the polar bears'.....We will adapt.
Having a quinquennial opportunity to choose different politicians to sort things out? Yeah, that'll work. Do voters in China have this topic as their top priority?Do you vote?
Blimey, turn that flown upside down Spindles.You're not getting it. We should've already dealt with this existential threat but didn't. The oven is turned up so melting will happen, and the costs are gargantuan, and it's too late. All this whining about "excuses for green tax" is insignificant compared to the costs of inaction that are inevitable, and have been occurring already and will continue to build.
"I'm not going back to live in a cave". the deniers say, but it's not their choice if they do or do not (their offspring anyway) especially after blowing all the opportunities to do so.
You know full well what it means. We meaning the collective efforts of mankind acting in communities, large and small, trying to reduce the impact that industrialisation has had on the climate.What can "we" do?
Probably is not something that any responsible politician, or the society they serve, can rely on.You have probably max about another 50 years of burning before fusion and other energy sources take over the main roles. From that point the reversal system won't only have slowed increases they will be beating them back.
As for the melting.....'won't someone please think of the polar bears'.....We will adapt.
You know full well what it means. We meaning the collective efforts of mankind acting in communities, large and small, trying to reduce the impact that industrialisation has had on the climate.
Just opened this thread, been away for a bit, and noticed this post.I live near to Berkeley and Oldbury. Neither have been generating for many years, but neither will be moved nor finished on their decommissioning for at least another 50 years. Nuclear is a timebomb.
Didn't ask you that.Having a quinquennial opportunity to choose different politicians to sort things out? Yeah, that'll work. Do voters in China have this topic as their top priority?
Whereas whether I vote in a country responsible for, at most, 1% of damaging emissions is the final word on the subject.Didn't ask you that.
I take it that's a yes, therefore hypocritical
Blimey, turn that flown upside down Spindles.
You sound like you lost a tenner and found a fiver.
As you appear to be off on another wander into the pedantic forest I won’t be joining you.Not an answer.
Again, what can "we" to to mitigate the effects of another runway at Gatwick?
Just opened this thread, been away for a bit, and noticed this post.
I can see Oldbury, the white castle, from my house.
And my parents live about a mile from the Berkeley one.
Just went to and from Bratislava from Vienna by train, almost entire way the land is strewn with wind turbines and pylons, what a terrible sight