Jump to content

  • Log in with Twitter Log In with LinkedIn Log In with Google      Sign In   
  • Create Account

With your Shetlink login details, all classifieds, private messages, and invoices are now accessed through the new Njord | Market system. Please see Njord | Market FAQ for more details.

Photo

Climate Change & Global Warming


  • Please log in to reply
2279 replies to this topic

Poll: How important is Global Warming to you in the Grand Scheme of Things? (246 member(s) have cast votes)

How important is Global Warming to you in the Grand Scheme of Things?

  1. Give me a break, I've enough on my plate (17 votes [6.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.56%

  2. I suppose there's something in it, but it's for the Politicians/Corporations/Those in power to sort out (4 votes [1.54%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.54%

  3. Yes I think it is important and I try to do my bit. (79 votes [30.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 30.50%

  4. If we don't stop it, the Planet dies in a few years, it's as simple as that. (34 votes [13.13%])

    Percentage of vote: 13.13%

  5. I think it is all hype and not half as bad as they make out (108 votes [41.70%])

    Percentage of vote: 41.70%

  6. I don't know what to think (17 votes [6.56%])

    Percentage of vote: 6.56%

Vote Guests cannot vote

#16 Evil Inky

Evil Inky

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1087 posts

Posted 06 December 2006 - 09:27 AM

try not to worry to much about global warming as some day the sun will go oot and maybe even afore dat the earths core will cool and solidify and we will lose our magnetic field which shields us from the sun's radiation.

But not before the sun grows to thousands of times its current size and engulfs the entire solar system.


Apparently, we've got roughly five billion years before that happens. There won't be a human race by then - we'll have evolved into something else!

#17 Guest_Anonymous_*

Guest_Anonymous_*
  • Guests

Posted 06 December 2006 - 01:52 PM

well sometthing else better watch out when the turd hits the fan!

#18 Njugle

Njugle

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 6910 posts

Posted 06 December 2006 - 01:56 PM

Gordon Brown just announced his budgetary intention that all new-builds in the UK have a zero carbon footprint.

How would you do that then? Plant a tree for every block built? Use no machinery? Anybody clued up on the subject?

#19 trout

trout

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 6453 posts

Posted 06 December 2006 - 02:06 PM

Dunno, but thats usually how these "carbon free" things work I think. It's just off-setting carbon emissions by planting trees to compensate.

There are computer companies doing it now for every chip / board manufactured they plant equivalent trees to counteract the carbon emissions released in the production process.

#20 Twerto

Twerto

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 2601 posts

Posted 06 December 2006 - 02:08 PM

http://www.carbonfootprint.com

#21 DeMascus

DeMascus

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 253 posts

Posted 06 December 2006 - 06:37 PM

A nice although worrying set of graphs from the BBC. My opinion is that we as a species depend entirely on the planet, and everything we do has an effect, so we shoud try to limit that effect as much as possible!

Somehow it doesn't seem we are doing that.

Posted Image

#22 tarotangel

tarotangel

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 497 posts

Posted 07 December 2006 - 12:43 PM

I try to do my bit as much as possible with the thr "r's" reduce, recycle, reuse. The three r's concept isn't really a new thing it wasn't a terrible long while ago that it was always done, then it was called make do and mend, folk just couldn't afford to buy new things. Having been brought up with it although in the '80's it was spend, spend, spend and I got teased about it in school.

The problem is that there is so many different arguments casted about by scientists either saying that the end of the world is nigh or that there is nothing to worry about. I think that everything we do has consequences for everyone else. The global warming weather changes is that just down to us or are we just coming out of an ice age?

I do think that putting lots of chemicals out into the ether isn't a good thing either, I mean if you're not allowed to touch some of these chemicals because it's bad for you why is it good to pollute the atmosphere with them?

#23 Guest_Anonymous_*

Guest_Anonymous_*
  • Guests

Posted 18 January 2007 - 08:39 AM

was reading an interesting article the other night about this issue and this article describes us as being in the turd , kinda up to were necks in da turd . ( I may quote more of the article if the debate takes of.)
So this article reckoned the only thing that could save the plane now was to introduce a global system of carbon rationing , with every person getting a ration of how much carbon they emit and each country government getting a ration relevant to that countries population.
sounds wild i know , but these scientists reckoned we may have less the a decade left before we pass a critical point and global warming will go critical and even if we stopped all burning of fossil fuels dead we would be f**ked.
carbon rationing anyone , get issued with a yearly energy quota?

#24 OriginalUsername

OriginalUsername

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 73 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 10:53 AM

Personally I believe global warming is a massive threat to our race. But humans will always be consuming, wasteful little beasties. I mean, I think that climate change is the biggest issue to face our race... pretty much ever, yet here I am, sitting in a heated office, drinking a cup of tea made in the electric kettle, pishing around on a computer, making phone-calls, wearing clothes produced in factories... the list goes on.
If I truly lived in relation to how important I find the climate change issue I'd be wearing animal fur and sitting in a mud hut (okay, exaggeration, but you get my point). But I'm just a consuming, wasteful little beastie. I save where I can of course, but I don't think that saving energy is the answer to global warming. It definitely helps, but I don't think it's the answer.

I think that we HAVE to start finding other methods of producing power. Clean ways. Yes, I am talking about renewable energy but I also believe that if we must resort to nuclear power as a temporary measure until we are fully renewable, then we should. I definitely don't think it's a long-term solution, but it could fill in some gaps until renewables are fully implemented world-wide.

Just an interesting little ditty to add: The whole "reduce your carbon footprint by planting a tree" thing...not necessarily true. There is new research that shows that, in order for it to actually be effective in combatting global warming, the tree has to be planted in a specific longitude/latitude. I haven't got the time to go searching around online for this, but basically if you plant a forest too far north/south it could actually have a detrimental effect (albeit a small one) instead of a positive one. Have a look around for it. I'm sure I read a series of articles about it in The Guardian.

#25 fratelli

fratelli

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 103 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 11:29 AM

This is an interesting tool...

http://flood.firetree.net/

It lets you see which areas will be affected by certain rises in sea levels.
It may revise your ideas about global warming, if you find out that your hoose could only be accessible with scuba gear if the sea level rises above 6m!!!

#26 Seaflech

Seaflech

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 12:16 PM

We can't put the issue of the world warming up firmly at the feet of humans. There are many, many variables that contribute to the problem we are facing today. It is not a new problem by any means, it is just the way we are reacting to it that has changed. 18,000 years ago the whole of Northern Europe including Britain, Ireland and halfway down France was covered in a massive ice sheet. This has been retreating ever since, not due to us pumping out carbon but by the Earth's natural cycles of getting warmer for a while then getting colder.
It is widely believed that the dinosaurs were wiped out by climate change, surely not down to their penchant for V8 SUV's for doing the school run. We are technically still coming out of the last ice age since the Earth is still warming up, but how much of this is down to Homo S Apien is of course open for debate, and there are wildly differing views depending which side of the fence you are sitting on.

The 'solution' to Global warming has got to be just that. Global.
We are getting taxed to the hilt for our vehicles, our air travel (I saw a figure quoting the contribution that air travel makes to overall carbon emmision is 1.4% of the total, but I'm sorry I cannot find that source at present, will include it when I can), and everything else. Meanwhile our gas-guzzling buddy's across the pond continue to refuse to sign up to Kyoto, still contribute far more per head of population to the overall worldwide pollution (America has 5% of the worlds population but use 20% of total oil output(OPEC)) and China, in it's current economic growth are planning to open a coal-fired power station at the rate of ONE A WEEK for the next SEVEN YEARS (BBC report, 2 Nov 2006). Makes your lower tax 1.1L car pale into insignificance a bit doesn't it. I know every little helps and all, but the phrase farting against thunder does spring to mind.

Whatever happens we are going to have to come up with new energy sources, as oil will run out in this century at our current rate of usage, and probably in the first half of it.

Nuclear power is an option as quoted above, but the words 'nuclear power' and 'temporary' don't sit very well together unfortunately.
The politicians will have to weigh up whether the evironmental argument against it is stronger than the need for a dependable non-carbon based energy source.

Better get the whale oil lamps dusted off...........

#27 trout

trout

    Advanced Member

  • Moderators
  • PipPipPip
  • 6453 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 12:31 PM

Indeed. That was my reaction to droilkers "in da sh*t" post.

America don't even officially recognise there is a problem and China is moving into a coal fired industrial era. That squarely puts us in the sh*tter if all we have left is a decade to sort it all out!

Besides if a super volcano like Krakatoa were to errupt again like it did in 535AD, potentially creating the Dark Ages, then we will be screwed! Theres more greenhouse gases spewed out the Earth by one of those babies in an eruption than humans could ever hope to spew out in a year!

#28 McFly

McFly

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 1411 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 01:37 PM

It is not a new problem by any means, it is just the way we are reacting to it that has changed.


That's not strictly true Seaflech.

Global climatic variation is certainly not a new phenomenon, but it's thought that the speed with which this latest cycle is happening is unprecedented.

I don't mean to be pedantic, but I think it's an important point to investigate when trying to establish our level of responsibility for climate change.

#29 junior

junior

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 293 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 01:50 PM

if a super volcano like Krakatoa were to errupt ...


On a similar note of natural events contributing, the thawing of the permafrost in Siberia could eventually release up to 70 billion tonnes of methane into the atmosphere.

Read more here:
http://www.guardian....1546824,00.html

#30 Seaflech

Seaflech

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPip
  • 372 posts

Posted 18 January 2007 - 01:52 PM

I think it's an important point to investigate when trying to establish our level of responsibility for climate change.


I fully agree. The point I was trying to make was that 'our' doesn't just mean you and I, but the whole planet.

If there was a water shortage and you were desperately trying to save every drop while your neighbours were having water fights in their leaky pool, washing their car and replenishing the plants then you would wonder why they aren't making a similar effort to change.

OK maybe not the best analogy but you get my point (maybe)!