|
|
|
|
 |
Author |
|
| Message | |
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 45714
Location: yes
|
|
|
|
 |
Nicky cigreen
Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 9727
Location: Devon, uk
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 45479
Location: Essex
|
|
|
|
|
Nicky cigreen
Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 9727
Location: Devon, uk
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 45714
Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 45479
Location: Essex
|
 Posted: Fri May 17, 24 4:19 pm Post subject: |
 
|
| Nicky cigreen wrote: |
40% is great but to turn that around just as the piss take did - that's 60% not great. I agree - 60% is an improvement on 100% not great,
but it is only an improvement .. EV users are still part of the problem
And how do the figures look if everyone switches from ICE to EV tomorrow. |
So are you suggesting that this is pointless? I'm not sure what you mean.
The facts are the facts, people do lots of stuff that is unnecessary; holidays, driving, buying loads of old shit etc.
To my mind anything that reduces the CO2 produced by any of them is a good thing.
I'd prefer that air travel was taxed properly, but it isn't. I therefore support any measure that makes it less damaging, we are within reach of commercial electric flight, sustainable aviation fuel (yeah I know) has been proven to save 36% of CO2 emissions on a NY to London flight:
https://corporate.virginatlantic.com/gb/en/media/press-releases/virgin-atlantic-flight100-saved-95-tonnes-of-co2.html
I live next door to a guy that is a pyromaniac, he has a huge bonfire every weekend, I don't know what he burns but really? It's mental, but as far as I know there's no law against it, and I'm not going to go down there and thump him.
Stuff should be mandated, just like ULEZ which has made a HUGE difference in London even though there are a huge number of people that oppose it:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/dec/28/london-ulez-averts-more-air-pollution-than-that-caused-by-capitals-airports-report-shows
More stuff needs to be mandated, government needs to mean what it says on insulation, and they need to be brave on charging polluters for their emissions. |
|
|
|
|
Nicky cigreen
Joined: 25 Jun 2007
Posts: 9727
Location: Devon, uk
|
| Posted: Fri May 17, 24 5:46 pm Post subject: |
|
| tahir wrote: |
| Nicky cigreen wrote: |
40% is great but to turn that around just as the piss take did - that's 60% not great. I agree - 60% is an improvement on 100% not great,
but it is only an improvement .. EV users are still part of the problem
And how do the figures look if everyone switches from ICE to EV tomorrow. |
So are you suggesting that this is pointless? I'm not sure what you mean.
The facts are the facts, people do lots of stuff that is unnecessary; holidays, driving, buying loads of old shit etc.
To my mind anything that reduces the CO2 produced by any of them is a good thing.
..... |
I am concerned that some people will believe that if they make this one change in their lives, then they can carry on with everything else guilt free and point at others for the crisis we are facing. When people do not acknowledge that some of the power their vehicle is using still comes from fossil fuels, or ignore that they buy goods that are transported using diesel, if they don't understand that driving much less would also reduce emissions, that perhaps they should make an effort to drive less too, then it shows a naivety that tends to make me tune out about anything else they say on the subject.
But yes, generally any reduction is CO2 is a good thing. And yes, people do unnecessary emission make things - we all do. So yes this is part of the solution, but as I have said before I also think rewarding people who opt to use less could also be a useful tool.
So no, I don't think it is pointless, I just think we need to be honest about how good it is. There is a long way to go.
Early adopters are great, they pave the way for the rest of us. We need solutions for everyone though. So people are not penalised if they dont have a personal parking space to home charge from. Or own their own roof to general power off of etc. I want to see more EV public transport. etc.
| Quote: |
| More stuff needs to be mandated, government needs to mean what it says on insulation, and they need to be brave on charging polluters for their emissions. |
I agree. |
|
|
|
|
Mistress Rose
Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 15682
|
| Posted: Sat May 18, 24 7:24 am Post subject: |
|
I think all of us agree about needing to use more solar, wind and other really sustainable power, about long term insulation and less polluting vehicles etc. We probably disagree about how we get there and what we should do now.
Nicky, I totally agree with you that we all need to look at what we can do to pollute less as individuals and that the biggest polluters need more education. We don't drive anything like as much as we used to, and use a hybrid car as we weren't ready to go the whole way to electric,, nor could we get the sort of car we needed in electric. Investing in solar on the roof is a big investment, even if you own your own roof, and adding heat pump is going to add an awful lot more if you also have to have your house completely insulated.
As far as burning, I agree Tahir that your neighbour sounds a bit of a pyromaniac, but I think burning wood has its place. If we lose power, we can manage very well with candles and a wood fire; remember we went through the rolling power cuts of the 3 day week in the early 1970s. Using locally cut wood does use some fossil fuel, but with more electric chainsaws coming in, even that is reducing, so it is just electrifying the stage from wood through bringing it to be cut, cutting and splitting, and local delivery that needs electrifying. If the wood is left uncut it has other consequences such as loss of bird and insect life and a lot of the biodiversity loss in the UK is put down to lack of woodland management. I know this may be against some peoples ideas, but it is true. Open areas in woodland, glades, coppice areas etc. and particularly woodland edges are the richest in wildlife. |
|
|
|
|
jema
Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28145
Location: escaped from Swindon
|
|
|
|
|
Mistress Rose
Joined: 21 Jul 2011
Posts: 15682
|
|
|
|
|
jema
Downsizer Moderator
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 28145
Location: escaped from Swindon
|
|
|
|
|
dpack
Joined: 02 Jul 2005
Posts: 45714
Location: yes
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 45479
Location: Essex
|
|
|
|
|
Slim
Joined: 05 Mar 2006
Posts: 6552
Location: New England (In the US of A)
|
|
|
|
|
tahir
Joined: 28 Oct 2004
Posts: 45479
Location: Essex
|
|
|
|
|
|
Archive
Powered by php-BB © 2001, 2005 php-BB Group
Style by marsjupiter.com, released under GNU (GNU/GPL) license.
|
View Latest Posts