IPCC Synthesis Report

[biffvernon]

What seems particularly sad is the lack of warning for so many people. Over on the netweather forum we've been watching this storm since last Monday.

 

[Nemesis]

News today - GB and climate change:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/7101075.stm

 

[Penners]

Penners - A wasted life, clearly you were cut out for rock musicianship and eco stardom.

It was only the lack of a bio-fuelled guitar that stood in my way....

 

[Nemesis]

I gather it is alleged bio-fuel has had its day, and it's not the solution many thought it would be. I appreciate Mr Branson is experimenting with it for trains (west coast line) and aircraft, but the latter is apparently a long way away.

http://www.biofuelwatch.org.uk/

 

[Penners]

I gather it is alleged bio-fuel has had its day

Not nearly as much as my guitar playing has. I haven't touched the thing for about 20 years.

 

[Nemesis]

Air guitar - so much easier on the environment (and the ear).

 

[Penners]

Hmmmm - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ByFdvhGVzw8

 

[Nemesis]

You can have a special dispensation re the attire.

 

[biffvernon]

Come on kiddies, back to the subject.

Following speeches by Brown and Benn today, there seems to be something in the air. Any guesses as to how this will pan out?

http://www.politics.co.uk/news/opin...al-affairs/100m-boost-green-homes-$481722.htm

"Announcing the Green Homes Service this morning, environment secretary Hilary Benn said: "When it comes to cutting your carbon footprint, the old adage 'there's no place like home' really is true.
"We need to make this as easy as possible for people to do. There's a lot of help out there in the form of grants, advice, and other assistance, but it’s hard to know where to start."
He said the new-look Energy Saving Trust would act as a one-stop shop to extend the use of renewable energy at home and improve efficiency.
The government wants 150,000 homes to be generating their own renewable energy by 2011, but recognises householders will need government help to meet this goal.
Mr Benn continued: "The Green Homes Service will cut through the confusion by providing a one stop shop, including a green MOT for your home and a green home makeover."
Housing minister Yvette Cooper is also backing the initiative, which launches on April 1st 2008. "

 

[Nemesis]

a one stop shop, including a green MOT for your home and a green home makeover."

I can tell you one thing - it won't be good for period buildings, and I bet it becomes a cash cow for some.

More uPVC windows - well it's green innit?

They are re-arranging the deckchairs.

 

[middi]

I Know these are serious discussions, there is so much I would like to say but I don't know enough offensive words to properly complete my sentences.

It just reminds me of this old joke by Dave Allen about this Pope that needed a new hart

The Pope's second in command ( one of his 5 star general equivalent) making an appeal from the balcony to the masses congregated in St.Peters square.

( Italian accent required)

"" Gooda peepol , our holly faada, dee Pop, need new Haaart, wee aske all yoo faaitfools peepol to bee generoos, I am going to drop dees feather and when it lands on a peepol head that person weel bee chosen too donaate dee haaart to dee Pop
and piss be weed you" . And dropped the feather

In a massive roar the congregation replied

........" PISS ON DEE POPE TOO " ( he died)

 

[biffvernon]

I don't know enough offensive words to properly complete my sentences.

That's OK, just revert to Italian :lol:

 

[biffvernon]

The key objective in the face of climate change is to reduce the atmospheric concentration of carbon dioxide from the combustion of fossil fuel.

The entire debate when it comes to fossil fuels and climate change is focused on demand, the consumption of fossil fuels and the resultant emissions. This is not the only approach. Here I propose an alternative approach that totally ignores emissions but instead focuses on the extraction of fossil fuels from the ground.

We need to ask, will the current approach leave fossil fuels in the ground that would otherwise be extracted? Ultimately that is the only way to control atmospheric CO2 concentration.

Read the full article here: http://www.theoildrum.com/node/3263

 

[Nemesis]

Polly Toynbee in the Groan:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/2007/nov/20/climatechange.comment

Extract:

The head of the National Trust and the head of B&Q take on the awesome task of persuading the public to act. In Britain, where most of the press take a Jeremy Clarkson view, that's hard. These climate-change deniers and rightwing anarchists who resist even modest recyling plans will decry anything they see as "nanny state". This is where Brown will have to lead from the front. Sometimes he will have to tell people what to do, and there may be some pain to get this much gain.

But if Britain hits these targets, we will have done our share, knowing that if every country does likewise then global warming can be kept below the crucial extra 2C - and Brown will be celebrated as the green revolutionary.

Torygraph:

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/earth/main.jhtml?view=DETAILS&grid=A1YourView&xml=/earth/2007/11/19/eafred119.xml

Some people are getting hold of the idea that nations should be accountable for their carbon emissions according to the size of their populations.

German chancellor Angela Merkel recently suggested future national emissions targets should be allocated on a per-capita basis. But even that approach would be hopelessly inefficient at getting at the true villains.

"Rich people are increasingly distributed around the world," said Pacala. National targets won't find them. And if things get tough, watch out for a new breed of carbon-havens beyond the reach of the Kyoto police.

Already, some big carbon-emitting companies, like aluminium smelters, are relocating to countries likely to avoid future Kyoto-style emissions targets.

"To find the big carbon emitters, follow the money," Pacala says. He suggests two names. Al Gore is one. Nice joke, but I don't buy it, however many light bulbs he has in his mansion. More to the point, he suggests the Sultan of Brunei.

The sultan runs the oil-rich Borneo state of Brunei more or less as his personal fiefdom. He has a personal wealth recently estimated at $22 billion, rivalling Bill Gates as the world's richest man. But his lifestyle makes Gates look decidedly austere.

The sultan has an estimated 5000 cars, including several hundred Rolls-Royces - not many of them thought to be hybrids - as well as a private Boeing 747, six other planes and two helicopters.

And no, Brunei doesn't have any Kyoto targets.

 

[Flyfisher]

"To find the big carbon emitters, follow the money," Pacala says.

We've discussed the 'money = energy' relationship before and this is further support for that idea. This, I think, is one of the big problems; fossil fuels = wealth, and how many of us would be willing to give up a big proportion of our personal wealth, i.e. something that would materially reduce our standard of living?

Keeping oil/gas/coal in the ground would, of course, reduce CO2 emissions, but it runs against everything that current society, commerce and governments strive for, i.e. ever-increasing economic growth and personal wealth. It would be like trying to persuade people to give up a large portion of their income.

Implementing energy-saving measures like better house insulation, more DG (in uPVC frames - ugh!), smaller cars with better mpg etc etc is all a waste of effort if the money saved is then spent on other things that consume energy, either directly or indirectly. It's an example of fooling ourselves that we're doing something positive (which may be true in a limited sense) while having little or no effect on the overall problem.

I appreciate it's easy to appear negative, but is it really negative to point out the problems with proposed solutions, even if you don't have a better proposal? After all, if the best proposals are not going to work what's the point in pursuing them - better, surely, to recognise they won't work and focus our minds on finding proposals that would work instead of taking our mind off the problem by fooling ourselves we've got things under control.

All of which is a long-winded way of saying 'they are re-arranging the deckchairs'

 

[Nemesis]

In fact, what you mean is you wouldn't be prepared to make any sacrifices?

(Unless of course the lights go out, in which case there will be no alternative...)

 

[Flyfisher]

Oh dear. I try to avoid personalising things, especially in this context, because it's mass behaviour that is going to count, not just one individual.

But, since you insist, I can assure you that my personal carbon footprint has reduced massively since I 'downshifted' a couple of years ago. Now, when did you voluntarily give up 75% of your income, thereby achieving a massive carbon footprint reduction?

 

[Nemesis]

About 12 years ago.

But each person makes up the mass.

 

[Flyfisher]

Very good; between us we might start a trend that saves the planet :wink:

 

[JanieB]

I'm on our local council's "Working Party for Climate Change". I was at a meeting last night and was given a leaflet intending to inspire us to have eco-friendly houses.

If anyone is interested the websites are
http://www.coinet.org.uk and
http://www.climatex.org

Definitely have something related to period properties.