If you need urgent support, call 999 or go to your nearest A&E. To contact our Crisis Messenger (open 24/7) text THEMIX to 85258.
Options
Global warming
BillieTheBot
Posts: 8,721 Bot
So the debate rages again about the unprecedented heat wave. Is this just part of a cycle or caused by global warming?
Well some people, including unsurprisingly oil company CEOs and free market fanatics say this is just normal and colder weather will be back soon. However it appears that the earth is invariably warming up in a pattern that has nothing to do with cycles.
9 of the 10 hottest years in history have happened in the last 13 years. We are heading for a disaster of unprecedented consequences for the human race. We will probably not see it ourselves but our children and grandchildren will.
The Kyoto agreement will not have a major effect because the world's biggest polluter, responsible for 25% of all emissions, pulled out of it. Russia is another big offender, and unless more is done to cut emissions the earth will pay very dearly indeed for it all.
A depressing read in the Observer
So unless something drastic is done soon be prepared for regular scorching summers, miserable winters, floods, raised sea levels, endemic asthma and famine, for they are the shape of things to come.
Well some people, including unsurprisingly oil company CEOs and free market fanatics say this is just normal and colder weather will be back soon. However it appears that the earth is invariably warming up in a pattern that has nothing to do with cycles.
9 of the 10 hottest years in history have happened in the last 13 years. We are heading for a disaster of unprecedented consequences for the human race. We will probably not see it ourselves but our children and grandchildren will.
The Kyoto agreement will not have a major effect because the world's biggest polluter, responsible for 25% of all emissions, pulled out of it. Russia is another big offender, and unless more is done to cut emissions the earth will pay very dearly indeed for it all.
A depressing read in the Observer
So unless something drastic is done soon be prepared for regular scorching summers, miserable winters, floods, raised sea levels, endemic asthma and famine, for they are the shape of things to come.
Beep boop. I'm a bot.
0
Comments
Is there any evidence to support global warming or is this hot spell simply another fluctuation?
Others have even worse predictions
And what the world will be in 2050 if we do nothing about it
Meanwhile the world's biggest polluter plays tricks
everything i have read over the years doesn't point to things just getting warmer, more to things becoming more unstable and thats what i think is happening. from drought to flood to drought to tornadoes all to quickly. this summer in europe seems to going from flood to drought all to quickly.
The human and economic cost will be immense. I would recommend those thinking of buying a house to look at the flood history of the area. Unfortunately it is very likely floods will become common.
In a way I wished the world would run out of oil now, not in 50 years time. A lot of the problems we are experiencing, not only environmental but political, would disappear.
What to do though? America is hardly going to change their habits nor will Russia and the oil companies will only deny the problem. People are so set in their ways and so used to the rate of consumption we have. If it means inconvenience people won't want to change their habits.
We treat the earth like shit, we really do.
Exactly.
But fossil fuel creates the most profits. People don't understand alternative methods of creating power or dismiss them as too expensive or an eyesore. I can remember at school when I was younger - the pros and cons of all methods were weighed up and wind, wave and solar power were seen as too disadvantageous!
But if more and more people become more aware and change their habits - leaving the car at home, recycling etc. I believe it can change and people will demand changes from the governments and companies that prevent environmental reclamation.
The USA is a large polluter , but it is the biggest industrial nation on the earth.
The 3rd world (and China) shows far more disrespect toward the enviroment than the US does.
Most alternative power sources are more expensive than fossil fuels.
Wind farms are huge and ugly , who would like to live next to one of those , besides you would need thousands of them to equal the power output of a fossil fuel station , ditto tidal generators.
Hydroelectric power can only be used in a few locations.
The best way to protect the enviroment is at home , by walking or riding a bike instead of taking a car. Alas in larger countries (e.g America) this is often not possible.
Do you would know what that would result in? Global Chaos.
Oil companies would collapse , creating huge job losses , people would be queuing up for days to get the last remains of petrol. The militarys would seize oil stocks to keep themselves operating.
The oil-based Arab economies would collapse ...... need I go on?
We must become more efficient in our use of oil and other natural resources , alternative eenrgy sources such as fusion power are still a long way off.
The US government refuses to make any concessions on environmental issues simply because in typical unilateralist selfish fashion it puts the interests of corporate America before the welfare of the world.
A country that contains 4% of the world's population contributes to a quarter of all toxic emissions... you do the maths. The fact is the US government and its members have an enduring and mutually beneficial love affair with the oil corporations and the Detroit car making lobby and have little interest in pursuing alternative forms of energy.
Massive, pointless, gas-guzzling monsters are best sellers in the US due to a combination of lack of understanding of environmental issues by the population, ridiculously cheap petrol prices, an ever-present car culture and chronic under-investment in public transport.
US companies are- as usual- given the easiest of rides by its government and allowed to produce emissions far too high. And then whenever it's demanded Bush stamps down on the polluters all Dubya has to say is "American jobs are on the line" and everyone goes into a wankfest about how good the President is looking after its people.
All of this could be reversed quickly by some simple measures such as the implementation of a public transport system- even the British network looks god-sent compared with what's available in America- a green tax on petrol, stricter control of the industry and tax penalties to those who choose to drive 4 wheel monsters. Sadly we could be in for a long wait before a US President implements this.
As for alternative energies, whereas Britain is not one of the best suited countries many other nations can obtain most of their energy from hydroelectric plants, and a good deal more from solar, wind and tidal farms. That they cost more to set up is irrelevant. Money is not the issue here. Nor is the ‘ugliness’ of the installation. I for one would much rather look at a wind farm than the smoking blob of concrete fossil fuel power plants are. Nor that you will see many wind farms anyway, since offshore ones have been given the green light.
Money is always an issue.
Ths USA does have a major responsibility to clean up its act , its massive SUV cars and air conditioning units being 2 examples.
You mean it puts its own economies interests first , sounds like a pretty sensible thing to do.
Destroying the world doesn't seem a very sensible thing to me.
Imposing a reduction on emissions does not mean the companies involved would go bankrupt or even suffer. It means they would have to invest probably no more than 5% of their massive profits in clearer technology, more efficient filters, etc. No jobs need to be lost either. But of course, for the greedy CEOs and shareholders a dip of 5% in profits is clearly much worse than the destruction of the planet's ecosystem.
Private companies cannot be trusted to act responsibly. It's up to the governments to make sure they do.
I'd rather live next to a wind farm than live in a city blanketed in smog.
Yes, everyone should be making changes at home and such changes make a difference, however governments should be pushing for such changes and implementing environmental programmes rather than ignoring the seriousness of the problem.
Protecting the world and the sanctity of the human race is any country's first priority - not the economy.
Priority to you , but sadly not all people are as idealistic.
Most people struggle to make ends meet , so you could forgive them for not caring about the world when their children are dying of hunger.
The short term is what matters to most people , getting a large yield of rice or wheat for example , fertilisers and pesticides give massive increases in yields , so farmers use them.
World leaders are politicians , they are concerned with getting re-elected , that wont happen if they shut down polluting factories where thousands earn a living and thus losing thousands of votes.
You have to find a balance between the enviroment and protecting jobs and profits.
Without people there is no economy anyway - so why should we destroy ourselves and our planet for the sake of it?
I don't know, I just find it sad how everything is fuelled by money rather than what is right.