Movie Time: The Age of Stupid

[yamin]

Surely the real threat to the universe and all thats in it. Come on doctor!

 

[skier-hughes]

Sorry Robin, you are of course totally correct.

 

[FamilyWiggs]

Surely the real threat to the universe and all thats in it. Come on doctor!

The problem with Daleks was that they couldn't manage the stairs too well. No doubt our resident spellchecker will similarly trip themself up, if we wait around here for long enough.

 

[skier-hughes]

Tut tut Robin, same back to you

 

[FamilyWiggs]

As Manuel used to say so well:

"Che?"

Never mind, don't bother to explain; not really interested enough.

We could delve back into some of the interesting Malthusian content further up thread, but I think I join GSH (virtually that is) in a coffee whilst we still can.

 

[Flyfisher]

Biff doesn't have to persuade the masses though does he? He clearly states they have until December to persuade the government.

In which case we are truly doomed. How can anyone believe that any government is going to start implementing/enforcing any significant environmentally-freiendly actions within 9 months when no practical progress has been made since the Kyoto Protocol was 'agreed' by governments in 1992? Besides, the G20 are too occupied at present getting the global economy growing again - hardly an environmentally-aware preoccupation I suggest.

The scientific community is discussing detailed mechanisms: how to forecast non-linear dynamical systems such as melting ice sheets; response times of plankton growth to lowering sea water pH levels; shifts is monsoon rainfall patters; energy transfers is tropical storms etc etc 1600 times..

Indeed, and their models don't seem to be particularly accurate - as Lovelock has been pointing out for years - which is why they've recently had to significantly adjust their "predictions" for this century.

 

[yamin]

I'm relieved to see that there are some posters here who still believe in humour - I was on the point of announcing that I'd rather take a C02 emission gun to the bloody ozone layer myself than live in a world where humour is not allowed! But I see my consumerist ass is saved, for today.

Ooh, please, someone earnest and without humour, tell me off, I can't wait! (Can you tell my interest in this discussion also waning? Hope the rest of 'the masses' (who he?) behave better, dear oh dear....) :shock:

 

[yamin]

Hmmmm, not convinced that Biff would appreciate 12 pages of his recurring passionate doctrine dismissed as 'wind up', but still......

 

[Schoolmarm]

In which case we are truly doomed. How can anyone believe that any government is going to start implementing/enforcing any significant environmentally-freiendly actions within 9 months when no practical progress has been made since the Kyoto Protocol was 'agreed' by governments in 1992?

Have I misunderstood then? I thought the government had to stop coal burning thingies.Or make a decision about coal burning thingies. Which I think even they can manage to do by December.

As for Daleks, yamin, clearly you are the expert. Possibly you can point to a number of peer-reviewed papers to support that view?

:lol: :lol:

 

[yamin]

Don't remember ever declaring myself an expert , but while you're declaring people as things, can I can be queen please? Much more interesting, and I get to chop peoples heads off! (Assuming there are any above the parapet!)


http://www.access.gpo.gov/congress/house/science/cp105-b/sousci.html

 

[yamin]

Guilty as charged m'lord (My passion carried me away......Ah, remember those days....)

 

[biffvernon]

I see the mice have been at play while I've been in my shed this afternoon.

Back on topic, here's a message from the director of the film The Age of Stupid:

A massive cheer from Team Stupid to everyone who helped spread the word about the premiere. The Film Council (who lent us a few quid for the event) carried out an official survey at three of the cinemas and were totally bowled over by the results, which are way, way better than for a normal film: 98% of viewers liked the film (56%: excellent, 31%: very good, 11%: good, 2%: fair, 0%: poor), 98% said they would recommend it to their friends and.... wait for it.... 75% of them had heard about the film from word of mouth (as opposed to our non-existent advertising, reviews etc). Hats off to all you word-of-mouthers. What a team effort.

 

[Flyfisher]

Have I misunderstood then? I thought the government had to stop coal burning thingies.Or make a decision about coal burning thingies. Which I think even they can manage to do by December.

Yes, I think you have misunderstood. It's not a matter of what they can do, it's what they actually do. Still, once they've re-invigorated the economy and returned us to ever increasing growth, expanded the number of flights from Stansted and built a new runway at Heathrow then perhaps they'll withold licences for new coal burning power stations - assuming the electorate is happy to put up with power cuts, of course. Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if they see the building of new coal-fired power stations as a good way of kick-starting the economy and generating loads of new jobs.

I apologise for this gloomy outlook but I'm just extrapolating from the government track record since Kyoto in 1992, i.e. s*d-all action of any consequence over the past 17 years.

 

[FamilyWiggs]

However, surely you approve of expanding airports? Should we not be building more of them?

Careful there DrNemesis - you're a troll and I claim my £5. If not, I'll eat my headgear.

 

[FamilyWiggs]

I should have followed my own advice DrNemesis, you're right. How silly of me to get drawn in. :roll:

 

[Schoolmarm]

Have I misunderstood then? I thought the government had to stop coal burning thingies.Or make a decision about coal burning thingies. Which I think even they can manage to do by December.

I apologise for this gloomy outlook but I'm just extrapolating from the government track record since Kyoto in 1992, i.e. s*d-all action of any consequence over the past 17 years.

 

[DaveBrigg]

The Film Council... carried out an official survey at three of the cinemas and were totally bowled over by the results, which are way, way better than for a normal film: 98% of viewers liked the film (56%: excellent, 31%: very good, 11%: good, 2%: fair, 0%: poor), 98% said they would recommend it to their friends

Impressive, but I imagine that this was preaching to the converted, so maybe not a guide to public opinion in general. At the weekend Age of Stupid ranked 14th in gross takings, one place below Hotel For Dogs. However, it was only shown at 20 cinemas, a fraction of the number of screens taken up by all its rivals. It topped the rankings for highest average takings per screen.

The issue of smoking shows how hard it is to change people's behaviour. A significant number cannot, or don't want to give up despite the immediate cost and health damage to themselves and often their families. Is it likely that they will give up cheap flights or car use to save people far away, who may be affected some time in the future? IMHO any significant change in behaviour will have to come through legislation.

If I am to lobby the government, can someone fill in the blanks below (based on informed scientific opinion) .

Dear Prime Minister
At Copenhagen, please persuade all developed countries to reduce their carbon emissions by _____% In the UK we need to reduce our emissions by ____ % by the year ______ .

In order to achieve this reduction, the UK needs to show leadership by taking the following measures.
1. Erect at least __________ new wind turbines, on land or offshore, which will reduce emissions from caol fired power stations by _____%.
2. Reduce the emissions of industry by at least ____%, through the means of ____________
3. Cut household emissions by at least _____ % by making sure that __________
4. _______________________________

 

[Lime]

According to a TV review Shell (I think.... was only half listening) who take nigerian oil also burn off the gas.
What caught my attention was the recall of one in the TV discussion.
He said the gas burnt off (it is not collected) is equivalent to 10,000,000 carbon emissions of UK homes.

 

[biffvernon]

Yes, Lime, gas flaring is one of the greatest scandals, not just in Nigeria but in many oilfields where the gas-gathering infrastructure has been deemed uneconomic by the oil companies. The problem is that externalities such as the cost of CO2 emission does not feature in the oil company accounts. That's why we need carbon emission limits, caps, trades or other mechanisms that make it prohibitively expensive to flare gas.

Oh Dave, those are impossibly hard questions. We just don't have the certainty to be able to say that x CO2 reduction will have y effect on climate change. Our government say it is committed to 80% reduction by 2050. This is a step further than many nations, but rhetoric is one thing, action another. In any case even that rate of reduction may prove too little too late. Meanwhile, our government appears to be determined to push ahead with the coal-fired Kingsnorth power station. To allow this shows that there is no commitment towards the carbon reductions that are required.

Thanks for the film figures. Where did they come from?

 

[Flyfisher]

Regarding the numbers to fill in DaveBrigg's letter, wasn't that the objective of the Kyoto Protocol? There doesn't seem to be a lack of talking, lobbying and conferencing but there's precious little actual progress in actively stabilising, never mind reducing, our global carbon emissions. For whatever reasons, people and governments are simply not engaging head-on with the issue. Perhaps things will change after the Copenhagen conference at the end of this year.