bobmac
Major Champion
And yet the government are pumping £20bn into building Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant which will add £10-15 to the average household bill until 2060
And it won't be 'online' until 2025.
Has environmental evangelism replaced the religious envagelism?
- Thread starter Bunkermagnet
- Start date
And yet the government are pumping £20bn into building Hinkley Point C nuclear power plant which will add £10-15 to the average household bill until 2060
And it won't be 'online' until 2025.
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
The general public just live their lives, there were no warnings about climate change or how plastics could spread into the ecco system. If you lived through this period would you have been an ecco warrior? I doubt it very much, you would have got on with living unaware of such issues.
bobmac
Major Champion
Maybe they could save £106bn by cancelling HS2. That would help
https://www.newcivilengineer.com/latest/hs2-costs-top-106bn-oakervee-review-told-25-09-2019/
You'll have to show evidence of that claim as I've read the opposite thanks to regen braking where the motor slows down the car, not the brakes. The only real side affect is the motor creates electricity when slowing the car which charges the battery.
''A next-gen Leaf driver will never need the brake pedal, although it will still be there, for those “aggressive braking situations†according to Nissan. (In other words, panic stops.)
The advantages of maximizing regen braking are huge. Maintenance costs are lower because barely-used brake pads last for many thousands more miles. There are fewer particles of dust created which pollute the air and waterways. Stopping distances will be shorter too, as the car will start slowing down as soon as the driver begins to lift off the accelerator, rather than when he moves his foot to another pedal.
Most importantly, energy is recaptured rather than wasted, so the range in electric cars is improved''
https://www.wired.com/story/look-ma-no-brake-youll-drive-electric-cars-with-one-pedal/
Oops, almost forgot to mention reduction of CO2 emmissions and cleaner air in towns and cities
robinthehood
Hacker
Modern electric cars use regenerative breaking. Much better and less polluting than the breaking you refer to.
robinthehood
Hacker
Exactly , using the motors to slow the car rather than pressing a break.
Kellfire
Blackballed
So should the general public continue in that manner?
SocketRocket
Ryder Cup Winner
No, but hindsight is a fine thing, its wrong to castigate previous generations for things they were not and could not control or understand.
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
Back on Topic of environmental evangelism Greta Thunberg is irritating for sure but she’s just a kid who’s condition leaves her terrified of Climate change, the same way I was convinced that a nuclear war with the soviets was imminent when I was a kid. (Threads gave me nightmares)
Greta has been and is being used...the people behind her want to solve climate change with communism wrapped up in Agenda 21.
Greta has been convinced we adults are monsters by real monsters who would manipulate a child’s illness.
See past Greta, research the organisation behind her and draw your own conclusions.
Greta has been and is being used...the people behind her want to solve climate change with communism wrapped up in Agenda 21.
Greta has been convinced we adults are monsters by real monsters who would manipulate a child’s illness.
See past Greta, research the organisation behind her and draw your own conclusions.
Hitdaball
Active member
Perhaps she is terrified by climate change because it’s actually bloody terrifying, rather than because of her Aspergers.
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
She is actually terrified, no doubt about it but the poor little sock puppet is being manipulated awfully.
Take a few minutes to read this article.
https://quillette.com/2019/04/23/se...eater-good-greta-thunberg-and-child-activism/
I think her parents should be locked up.
Hitdaball
Active member
I don’t see anything in that article suggesting she is a “little
Sock puppetâ€.
I see lots of references to other health issues which she has and how those have impacted her.
I don’t doubt that her politics are formed in large part from her family, as most 16yr olds likely are but I don’t see a great deal of difference between this and say Hague at the Tory conference as a kid (albeit clearly one is much more successful than the other) and I don’t recall a great deal of fuss about Hauge.
Any intelligent 16 old who wanted to read up on the scientific consensus of human influenced climate change and its current path would understand it.
Sock puppetâ€.
I see lots of references to other health issues which she has and how those have impacted her.
I don’t doubt that her politics are formed in large part from her family, as most 16yr olds likely are but I don’t see a great deal of difference between this and say Hague at the Tory conference as a kid (albeit clearly one is much more successful than the other) and I don’t recall a great deal of fuss about Hauge.
Any intelligent 16 old who wanted to read up on the scientific consensus of human influenced climate change and its current path would understand it.
pendodave
Tour Rookie
Thank goodness we can just shoot the messenger (or their parents). Can't believe I was ever worried about any of this stuff...
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
Don’t fret...man made global warming is a myth... It’s an industry,
Scientists who sign up get lucrative grants and new jobs. Scientists who disagree get finished.
The world is still pulling out of the last ice age and temps are expected to rise, as they are.
They are just abusing this fact.
I’ll keep it simple but the warming lobby tell you that carbon dioxide is causing the planet to warm to a level where we will be generally flooded in 50 years.
That this CO2 is produced by us burning fossil fuels. Material that is naturally on this planet.
The amount of CO2 which Mount St. Helens blew out over 2 days when it blew in the early 80’s is
more than the industrialised world has exhaled in the last 30 years.
The “experts†were telling us 20 years ago that London, Holland and Maldives would be under water by now...Result- no sea level rise at all!
Told us ice caps would all be gone...
Northern ice caps reached a 50 year high 3 winters ago.
Remember the Romans were growing grapes as far North as Lincolnshire 2000 years ago.
Do some research...Another myth btw is that 95% of scientists agree about MMGW. No – 95% of the scientists attached to the International Panel on Climate Change agree but they have a vested interest. There are thousands of scientists who are sceptical about our part in global warming. They just don’t get any air time.
Scientists who sign up get lucrative grants and new jobs. Scientists who disagree get finished.
The world is still pulling out of the last ice age and temps are expected to rise, as they are.
They are just abusing this fact.
I’ll keep it simple but the warming lobby tell you that carbon dioxide is causing the planet to warm to a level where we will be generally flooded in 50 years.
That this CO2 is produced by us burning fossil fuels. Material that is naturally on this planet.
The amount of CO2 which Mount St. Helens blew out over 2 days when it blew in the early 80’s is
more than the industrialised world has exhaled in the last 30 years.
The “experts†were telling us 20 years ago that London, Holland and Maldives would be under water by now...Result- no sea level rise at all!
Told us ice caps would all be gone...
Northern ice caps reached a 50 year high 3 winters ago.
Remember the Romans were growing grapes as far North as Lincolnshire 2000 years ago.
Do some research...Another myth btw is that 95% of scientists agree about MMGW. No – 95% of the scientists attached to the International Panel on Climate Change agree but they have a vested interest. There are thousands of scientists who are sceptical about our part in global warming. They just don’t get any air time.
robinthehood
Hacker
There is a reason those scientists don't get any air time....
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
A myth 😂 reckon you have been reading too many of those articles that get passed around Facebook - and those scientists that don’t get air time ? It’s for a reason
robinthehood
Hacker
Of course it's a myth. Also the earth is flat and dinosaurs never existed.
Hitdaball
Active member
Random old gent on internet knows more than IPCC shocker.
I’m totally convinced by your post.
I’m totally convinced by your post.
Fade and Die
Medal Winner
Hitdaball
Active member
I’d suggest it’s incumbent on the guy who has googled a bit between medications to show proof rather than those standing by the body of work of 97% of the finest scientific minds on the planet no?
D
Deleted member 15344
Guest
https://www.google.co.uk/amp/s/climate.nasa.gov/evidence.amp
https://www.edf.org/climate/9-ways-we-know-humans-triggered-climate-change
- Simple chemistry – when we burn carbon-based materials, carbon dioxide (CO2) is emitted (research beginning in 1900s)
- Basic accounting of what we burn, and therefore how much CO2 we emit (data collection beginning in 1970s)
- Measuring CO2 in the atmosphere and trapped in ice to find that it's increasing, with levels higher than anything we've seen in hundreds of thousands of years (measurements beginning in 1950s)
- Chemical analysis of the atmospheric CO2 that reveals the increase is coming from burning fossil fuels (research beginning in 1950s)
- Basic physics that shows us that CO2 absorbs heat (research beginning in 1820s)
- Monitoring climate conditions to find that recent warming of the Earth is correlated to and follows rising CO2 emissions (research beginning in 1930s)
- Ruling out natural factors that can influence climate like the sun and ocean cycles (research beginning in 1830s)
- Employing computer models to run experiments of natural versus human-influenced simulations of Earth (research beginning in 1960s)
- Consensus among scientists who consider all previous lines of evidence and make their own conclusions (polling beginning in 1990s)
