|
|
Post by bancroft on Apr 28, 2023 13:43:14 GMT
Emmissions per person maybe as we were the global policeman before the US came along.
Would be interesting to see how much in total per country?
France for example, always a bigger country than us and had an empire before us.
|
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Apr 28, 2023 14:01:23 GMT
Emmissions per person maybe as we were the global policeman before the US came along. Would be interesting to see how much in total per country? France for example, always a bigger country than us and had an empire before us. 7th in total emissions. Not because we were the world's policemen though. Because we were the leading industrial nation from the birth of the Industrial Revolution until the turn of the 20th century. |
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 28, 2023 14:04:28 GMT
That's not the case - you are being fed a political line.
Historical emissions aren't an addressable problem(unless you have a time machine) but if you have a political agenda, it's perfect.
|
|
|
|
Post by Bentley on Apr 28, 2023 14:06:25 GMT
Why the trip down memory lane ? How can that help reduce emissions?
|
|
|
|
Post by Dan Dare on Apr 28, 2023 14:08:57 GMT
I'm very sceptical about this claim.
Your link claims that historical emissions are directly related to coal consumption, but as this chart shows the UK has not been amongst the top producers since the Second World War, and was overtaken by China in the late 60s.
In addition, the UK government statistics on coal consumption indicate that total coal production from the 1850s to 2021 was 2.54 billion tonnes, over 160 years. In comparison annual coal consumption in China is running at almost 4 billion tonnes annually. In other words China burns more coal every year than the UK has burnt in its entire history.
This dog don't hunt as they say in Alabammy.
|
|
|
|
Post by bancroft on Apr 28, 2023 14:09:04 GMT
Emmissions per person maybe as we were the global policeman before the US came along. Would be interesting to see how much in total per country? France for example, always a bigger country than us and had an empire before us. 7th in total emissions. Not because we were the world's policemen though. Because we were the leading industrial nation from the birth of the Industrial Revolution until the turn of the 20th century. Well empires and technological progress often go hand in hand as bigger rewards for entre-preneurs. |
|
|
|
Post by Montegriffo on Apr 28, 2023 14:19:12 GMT
That's not the case - you are being fed a political line. Historical emissions aren't an addressable problem(unless you have a time machine) but if you have a political agenda, it's perfect. We weren't the leading industrial nation until the 20th century? I think you'll find that is the case. It's not about an agenda. It's about accepting responsibility and doing all we can to atone for our environmental crimes. |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2023 14:21:33 GMT
I love it that an extremely wealthy person is telling us that we need to accept being poorer.
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 28, 2023 14:29:01 GMT
That's not the case - you are being fed a political line. Historical emissions aren't an addressable problem(unless you have a time machine) but if you have a political agenda, it's perfect. We weren't the leading industrial nation until the 20th century? I think you'll find that is the case. It's not about an agenda. It's about accepting responsibility and doing all we can to atone for our environmental crimes. Until the twentieth century, carbon emissions were very small in comparison to modern - you also have ambiguity regarding the size / definition of a country/ empire that(in some senses) spanned the globe in this period. It doesn't hold water It's nonsense, but it's nonsense you are more than happy to swallow wholesale. You would easily see this 'historical crime' notion were superfluous, if it were a non western country. |
|
|
|
Post by sandypine on Apr 28, 2023 15:19:30 GMT
That's not the case - you are being fed a political line. Historical emissions aren't an addressable problem(unless you have a time machine) but if you have a political agenda, it's perfect. We weren't the leading industrial nation until the 20th century? I think you'll find that is the case. It's not about an agenda. It's about accepting responsibility and doing all we can to atone for our environmental crimes. Of course it is about agenda as what happened in 1850 has little relevance to what exists today as many other things have to be factored in, the population, many of whom come from low emissions countries, the emigrant population who took with them the responsibility for emissions, the absorption of CO2 into plant life and the oceans which took much of the early industrial output of CO2. That is just for starters. |
|
|
|
Post by thescotsman on Apr 28, 2023 15:44:43 GMT
CO2 is plant food....we need more plant food.....there's a food crisis.... 
anyway CO2 has very little to do with "climate change" whatever you perceive climate change to mean.....anyway.......do carry on
|
|
|
|
Post by Orac on Apr 28, 2023 15:58:20 GMT
We weren't the leading industrial nation until the 20th century? I think you'll find that is the case. It's not about an agenda. It's about accepting responsibility and doing all we can to atone for our environmental crimes. Of course it is about agenda as what happened in 1850 has little relevance to what exists today as many other things have to be factored in, the population, many of whom come from low emissions countries, the emigrant population who took with them the responsibility for emissions, the absorption of CO2 into plant life and the oceans which took much of the early industrial output of CO2. That is just for starters. Then you can roll in the issue of immigration. Many who claim to be concerned about CO2 emission will also happily support the mass movement of people from the third world into the west. Presumably, despite the likely increased emissions this entails, it is considered something that has to happen (for some reason or another). An honest person is left scratching their head and wondering what motivation or goal could be linking all these positions into a cohesive whole. / sarcasm |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Apr 28, 2023 20:42:46 GMT
Talking about China wont hobble the western world or you and your family. They focus exclusively on their aims. 2060 being 37 years away, by which time they will rule the world whilst laughing at our foolishness. |
|
|
|
Post by Red Rackham on Apr 28, 2023 22:43:17 GMT
CO2 is plant food....we need more plant food.....there's a food crisis....
anyway CO2 has very little to do with "climate change" whatever you perceive climate change to mean.....anyway.......do carry on
Well said. |
|
|
|
Post by patman post on Apr 29, 2023 12:09:08 GMT
CO2 is plant food....we need more plant food.....there's a food crisis....
anyway CO2 has very little to do with "climate change" whatever you perceive climate change to mean.....anyway.......do carry on
The world is gradually becoming less green, scientists have found. Plant growth is declining all over the planet, and new research links the phenomenon to decreasing moisture in the air—a consequence of climate change.
The declines challenge an argument often presented by skeptics of mainstream climate science to downplay the consequences of global warming: the idea that plants will grow faster with larger amounts of carbon dioxide. The argument hinges on the idea that food supplies will increase.
It’s largely a red herring, as climate scientists have patiently explained for years. Rising CO2 does benefit plants, at least up to a point, but it’s just one factor. Plants are also affected by many other symptoms of climate change, including rising temperatures, changing weather patterns, shifts in water availability and so on.
|
|
