More doom and gloom

[MattyF]

43 minutes ago, peds said:

 

After centuries of destruction from fossil fuels, rampant industrialisation and unchecked capitalism, you choose to place the blame for our ultimate extinction on the people trying to put a band aid on the arterial bleed?

 

What kind of mental gymnastics is this?!

The whole point is it’s not green is it?  How is destroying the last pristine waterways and eco systems on the planet for mining and dams green…. It’s not hard to comprehend surely for you is it not? 
I live in a house that’s off grid , I have solar and a big turbine I’m trying to do my thing …. but when you look in to the logistics of the large turbines and there life span what is needed to be quarried and mined they might as well start digging for coal in open casts again… 

I have a Bolivian friend who in his lifetime all the waterways his community’s used as life have been poisoned and destroyed , the whole eco system has collapsed by mining for our essential battery ingredients, this whole bill shit thing is in my belief the last throw of capitalism to rape as much as possible for this so called green revolution/agenda. 

[openspaceman]

9 hours ago, daveatdave said:

the only problem with nuclear is disposing of the waste.

The problem with nuclear fission is the capital cost and the storing of waste, they are simply too expensive in the face of renewables becoming relatively cheaper.

[GarethM]

Maybe we can think of those renewable power types, that don't really see the bigger picture of how unclean and a waste of money it is.

 

They are ostriches getting shafted whilst buying their heads in the sand, probably whilst listening to a podcast of Gretta.

[peds]

Haha, yeah, don't get me started on Greta! She's the reason we are all in this mess in the first place! I reckon we can place the blame for the extinction of all complex life on Earth squarely on her shoulders...

[difflock]

I was recently reading an article about the owners of the land the windmills are sited on getting well shafted wrt end of life disposal and remediation costs, which I think also/could also include the cost of removing the massive subsurface concrete foundations, which is pure beaucratic twisted madness. How about leaving the conc founds insitu and simply burying them under green waste and then allow nature to take its course.

Btw a "green" neighbour, (he actually marches our property), has simply dumped his old windmill tower and kinda roughly cut up blades alongside a rodding, for the undergrowth and birch to hopefully hide. And this is environmentally friendly subsidized power generation!

[GarethM]

16 minutes ago, peds said:

Haha, yeah, don't get me started on Greta! She's the reason we are all in this mess in the first place! I reckon we can place the blame for the extinction of all complex life on Earth squarely on her shoulders...

As per usual, you go all sandwich board end of the world.

 

There will be no extinction, you know it, I know it, the bank manager at Siemens knows it.

 

It's that sort of doom monger rhetoric that's the problem, I watched a local councillor do such a thing about solar panels.

 

A good 5 minutes gushing over 20 panels in a field, the applicant owns a mansion with a swimming pool and a Ferrari.

 

Erm 20x250-400w = 5-7Kw, but wouldn't put them on his huge house!.

Edited April 18 by GarethM

[MattyF]

21 minutes ago, difflock said:

I was recently reading an article about the owners of the land the windmills are sited on getting well shafted wrt end of life disposal and remediation costs, which I think also/could also include the cost of removing the massive subsurface concrete foundations, which is pure beaucratic twisted madness. How about leaving the conc founds insitu and simply burying them under green waste and then allow nature to take its course.

Btw a "green" neighbour, (he actually marches our property), has simply dumped his old windmill tower and kinda roughly cut up blades alongside a rodding, for the undergrowth and birch to hopefully hide. And this is environmentally friendly subsidized power generation!

I don’t have much sympathy when you hear how much they have for having them on the land ! The ones I can see from home are rumoured to get around 1 million a year for land that is barely fit for grazing.

[Stere]

No extinction?

 

OK so maybe not total but  half by 2100 doesn't sound too good?

 

Holocene extinction - Wikipedia

EN.WIKIPEDIA.ORG

 

In The Future of Life (2002), Edward Osborne Wilson of Harvard calculated that, if the current rate of human disruption of the biosphere continues, one-half of Earth's higher lifeforms will be extinct by 2100. A 1998 poll conducted by the American Museum of Natural History found that 70% of biologists acknowledge an ongoing anthropogenic extinction event.

 

 

The 2019 Global Assessment Report on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services, published by the United Nations' Intergovernmental Science-Policy Platform on Biodiversity and Ecosystem Services (IPBES), posits that out of around eight million species of plants and animals, roughly one million species face extinction within decades as the result of human actions.^{[39][74][75][76]} Organized human existence is jeopardized by increasingly rapid destruction of the systems that support life on Earth, according to the report, the result of one of the most comprehensive studies of the health of the planet ever conducted.^[77] Moreover, the 2021 Economics of Biodiversity review, published by the UK government, asserts that "biodiversity is declining faster than at any time in human history."^[78][79] According to a 2022 study published in Frontiers in Ecology and the Environment, a survey of more than 3,000 experts says that the extent of the mass extinction might be greater than previously thought, and estimates that roughly 30% of species "have been globally threatened or driven extinct since the year 1500."^[80][81] In a 2022 report, IPBES listed unsustainable fishing, hunting, and logging as being some of the primary drivers of the global extinction crisis.^[82] A 2022 study published in Science Advances suggests that if global warming reaches 2.7 °C (4.9 °F) or 4.4 °C (7.9 °F) by 2100, then 13% and 27% of terrestrial vertebrate species will go extinct by then, largely due to climate change (62%), with anthropogenic land conversion and co-extinctions accounting for the rest.^[83][21][84] A 2023 study published in PLOS One shows that around two million species are threatened with extinction, double the estimate put forward in the 2019 IPBES report.^[85]

 

 

According to a 2023 study published in PNAS, at least 73 genera of animals have gone extinct since 1500. If humans had never existed, the study estimates it would have taken 18,000 years for the same genera to have disappeared naturally, leading the authors to conclude that "the current generic extinction rates are 35 times higher than expected background rates prevailing in the last million years under the absence of human impacts" and that human civilization is causing the "rapid mutilation of the tree of life."^[

Edited April 18 by Stere

[GarethM]

And how does that effect our 1% global CO2or even the UK ?.

 

Simple answers on the back of half a rizla.

 

Go refill the largest inland sea before you start lectures about the climate, once that's refilled you'll find a lot of the world returns to normal.

Edited April 18 by GarethM

[peds]

51 minutes ago, GarethM said:

There will be no extinction, you know it, I know it, the bank manager at Siemens knows it.

 

It's that sort of doom monger rhetoric that's the problem, I watched a local councillor do such a thing about solar panels.

 

No, the problem isn't people complaining about the direction we are headed. The problem is where we are headed. Victim blaming will achieve nothing. 

 

I'll make a deal with you... let's check in every 5 years until the year 2050 and see what the story is.