Emissions, Global warming or a scam

[Big J]

12 minutes ago, tree-fancier123 said:

I did learn the knot - handy for tidying a lanyard.

I don't doubt BigJs ability to build a superior dwelling to what the PLC builders offer - what I am pessimistic about is the idea of taking less profit and offering a bigger garden. You can do that locally, but the idea can't be scaled because of the sheer number of people coming to live in the Uk. If the figures are right net migration since 2000 is average of a quarter million per year, so surely that means another 100 000 new  homes approx, just to house new arrivals. Now the issue is with the size of plot for these new arrivals. The countryside has no say in it, only humans do.

It wouldn't be my ability to build homes, it would be my wife and her colleagues. I'm just an enthusiastic amateur. 

 

There is a business angle for offering superior, affordable housing that is ecologically sound. It will be much easier to obtain planning permission, much easier to persuade local communities to support new developments like this, and whilst the gross profit on each development is lower, the hassle factor should be seriously reduced, resulting in a lot of saved time, and therefore money. I am surprised (genuinely) that the big builders continue on the line of building such awful housing, knowing how unpopular it is. They try to persuade us that that is what we want, rather than asking us.

 

As regards countryside space, it's a much longer conversation, but firstly, there is plenty of space. Devon, for instance, has 1.4 acres for every man, woman and child here. Most counties are a little more densely populated, but not significantly so.

To make better use of space, we could consider the construction of low rise apartment blocks. We stayed with friends in Uppsala in Sweden many years ago in a lovely, spacious city centre flat which was part of a small block that encircled a communal garden and play area for the kids. It was genuinely a great place to live. 

 

We are very much focused on carving up our land so that each man has his castle. 2 reception rooms, 4 bedrooms, 2 bathrooms, garage, deck and garden. If we were more flexible about the way that we considered living, we could have a lot more for less of a financial and ecological cost. Back when I was younger and more studious, we went to see a chap called Alain de Botton at the Book Festival in Edinburgh. He'd written a book called the Architecture of Happiness, which he talked about. He later did a Channel 4 series called The Perfect Home, which was based on the book and explored some of the ideas in it. Very interesting stuff, and goes some way to explain how we could be doing a lot more with our built environment.

[Big J]

Very apt (news article on the BBC regarding the poor quality of new builds):

 

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-47826166

[Stubby]

There is always the moon ..

[breffni]

39 minutes ago, Stubby said:

There is always the moon ..

Ye we could fire old people like you into it!?

[Billhook]

I am worried about the accusation of being a climate change denier.   

 

Nobody denies that the climate changes the question is how much influence does human activity have on it.

 

There is a hypothesis that humans are causing it and like all scientific theories it needs to stand up to analysis and it is worrying and unscientific not to challenge that particular theory.

 

There are many other possibilities such as our orbit with the sun, the activity of the sun itself, the changing orbits of the planets, the heat coming from the Earth's core,  general radiation variations.   You cannot shut down conversation by shouting insults when the issue is mired with politics.

 

 

[Big J]

15 minutes ago, Billhook said:

I am worried about the accusation of being a climate change denier.   

 

Nobody denies that the climate changes the question is how much influence does human activity have on it.

 

There is a hypothesis that humans are causing it and like all scientific theories it needs to stand up to analysis and it is worrying and unscientific not to challenge that particular theory.

 

There are many other possibilities such as our orbit with the sun, the activity of the sun itself, the changing orbits of the planets, the heat coming from the Earth's core,  general radiation variations.   You cannot shut down conversation by shouting insults when the issue is mired with politics.

 

 

Climate change as a result of human activity is fact. There is an almost universal consensus amongst the scientific community and the evidence is irrefutable. 

[Big J]

7 hours ago, tree-fancier123 said:

I liked the quantitative analysis and you do have a point about the impact of having fewer people per house, but when you talk of population decline - it's like you're recoiling in horror at the thought of it. What are the dangers of population decline? Not enough money to pay pensions etc? Danger of being invaded by a more densely populated nation?

So I was exaggerating saying the population has nearly doubled since 1911, but it is still an extra 24m. Quite some acreage of building been going on. Can you extrapolate the growth into coming decades without tower blocks on the village green?

Sorry, missed this post last night.

 

Population decline in itself isn't necessarily a bad thing when applied very slowly, but a fertility rate of 1.8 would result in quite a rapid drop, and would also be characterised by a hugely unbalanced population, with a high percentage dependent on the state (being over retirement age) and the working population providing for them being a smaller percentage. 

 

What it comes down to for me is that there isn't anything that I can do with regards to population growth or decline. We've got two children and would have no more. We're replacing ourselves. What we possibly can do though is build a few good houses in an area that needs them, meaning that environmentally, we're doing our bit.

[difflock]

21 minutes ago, Big J said:

Climate change as a result of human activity is fact. There is an almost universal consensus amongst the scientific community and the evidence is irrefutable. 

Universal consensus is another way of saying groupthink, and driven by grants and funding.

Like a Consultants report for my employer many years ago which blandly stated "It is clear that  .  .  ." with no explanation or facts to explain why what was so clear was so clear.

But to what extent is climate change human caused, a / of a % or a more significent %? and how much is entirely natural.

For example anyone care to argue with an Ice Age caused advancing glacier, or how to prevent its inexorable advance, I dont doubt the IPCC would pontificate, quoting many "facts" but even they could not generate sufficient hot air to prevent the ice advancing.

So, simply, I do not believe it is within the power of man to change the affect of humankind on the Planet, with sufficient speed to contract the hugely alarming predictions of rapid climatic catastrophe, plus I would be more concerned about ever increasing habitat loss and specis extinctions.

Anyway I read a rather good article about the down through the ages predictions of "the end is nigh", and how the current breast-beating climate-change doom-mongers are merely the latest incarnation of this prevailing trend.

Marcus

 

Edited April 6, 2019 by difflock

[Big J]

8 minutes ago, difflock said:

Universal consensus is another way of saying groupthink, and driven by grants and funding.

Like a Consultants report for my employer many years ago which blandly stated "It is clear that  .  .  ." with no explanation or facts to explain why what was so clear was so clear.

But to what extent is climate change human caused, a / of a % or a more significent %? and how much is entirely natural.

Regardless I do not believe it is within the power of man to change the affect of humankind on the Planet, with sufficient speed to contract the hugely alarming predictions of rapid climatic catastrophe, plus I would be more concerned about ever increasing habitat loss and specis extinctions.

Anyway I read a rather good article about the down through the ages predictions of "the end is nigh", and how the current breast-beating climate-change doom-mongers are merely the latest incarnation of this prevailing trend.

Marcus

Apologies for being blunt, but you are wrong. 

 

The increase in C02 in the atmosphere has been incredibly rapid since the start of the industrial revolution, and the associated temperature rises globally conclusively prove that human industrial activity causes climate change. 

 

The individual effects of this temperature rise (which is not universally even across the globe - it's typically more pronounced in areas closer to the poles) are easily observable and are happening at a rate that we can and will see a major change in our lifetimes. Climate change isn't just restricted to temperature too, with precipitation and other weather activity changing too.

 

I'm not asserting that we'll be able to do anything meaningful to stop it now, as I think the realisation has occurred too late. However, we have to try.

 

It isn't helpful though when people cling on to the idea that we're not the cause of it. Yes climate change occurs naturally, and yes CO2 levels vary naturally, but never has the change occurred so rapidly and the C02 levels are now at their highest for 400,000 years.

[Stubby]

1 hour ago, Billhook said:

I am worried about the accusation of being a climate change denier.   

 

Nobody denies that the climate changes the question is how much influence does human activity have on it.

 

There is a hypothesis that humans are causing it and like all scientific theories it needs to stand up to analysis and it is worrying and unscientific not to challenge that particular theory.

 

There are many other possibilities such as our orbit with the sun, the activity of the sun itself, the changing orbits of the planets, the heat coming from the Earth's core,  general radiation variations.   You cannot shut down conversation by shouting insults when the issue is mired with politics.

 

 

Interesting . As an aside , how cool to be the last man ever to walk on the moon .

Edited April 6, 2019 by Stubby