Attention: Please take a moment to consider our terms and conditions before posting.
Climate Emergency
Comments
-
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.5 -
Of course I've read thw article. That's why I found an article refuting the nonsense of the headline. The methodology is inherently flawed - and the ludicrous headline is designed to obfuscate the real problem (fossil fuels are fucking up the environment).MrWalker said:
De bunked by someone 'working towards' a PhdLeroy Ambrose said:
Debunked as clickbait nonsense years ago:MrWalker said:Duplicate and unwanted photos taken on Britons’ phones are producing 355,000 tonnes of CO2 per year in data storage.
https://davidmytton.blog/dirty-data-carbon-footprint-of-photo-storage/
OK then
Have you read the article?
Doesnt de-bunk the carbon usage of storage.
But then, of course, you already know that.4 -
So, as you already know everything, where does your chosen article, written by a rank amateur, debunk the idea that pointless storage consumes CO2?Leroy Ambrose said:
Of course I've read thw article. That's why I found an article refuting the nonsense of the headline. The methodology is inherently flawed - and the ludicrous headline is designed to obfuscate the real problem (fossil fuels are fucking up the environment).MrWalker said:
De bunked by someone 'working towards' a PhdLeroy Ambrose said:
Debunked as clickbait nonsense years ago:MrWalker said:Duplicate and unwanted photos taken on Britons’ phones are producing 355,000 tonnes of CO2 per year in data storage.
https://davidmytton.blog/dirty-data-carbon-footprint-of-photo-storage/
OK then
Have you read the article?
Doesnt de-bunk the carbon usage of storage.
But then, of course, you already know that.2 -
Ah yes, the evil BBC falsely reporting an issue when, as you already know, no damage is being done at all to the environment creating EV batteries.Leroy Ambrose said:
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.
Maybe time for you to stop and think.2 -
And of course solid state batteries which are now being produced in China have far lower mineral requirements than existing EV batteries so at best that is a temporary problem.Leroy Ambrose said:
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.2 -
Strong 'so you hate waffles' energy...MrWalker said:
Ah yes, the evil BBC falsely reporting an issue when, as you already know, no damage is being done at all to the environment creating EV batteries.Leroy Ambrose said:
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.
Maybe time for you to stop and think.
0 -
People working towards a phd aren’t amateurs, they’re usually professional academics.MrWalker said:
So, as you already know everything, where does your chosen article, written by a rank amateur, debunk the idea that pointless storage consumes CO2?Leroy Ambrose said:
Of course I've read thw article. That's why I found an article refuting the nonsense of the headline. The methodology is inherently flawed - and the ludicrous headline is designed to obfuscate the real problem (fossil fuels are fucking up the environment).MrWalker said:
De bunked by someone 'working towards' a PhdLeroy Ambrose said:
Debunked as clickbait nonsense years ago:MrWalker said:Duplicate and unwanted photos taken on Britons’ phones are producing 355,000 tonnes of CO2 per year in data storage.
https://davidmytton.blog/dirty-data-carbon-footprint-of-photo-storage/
OK then
Have you read the article?
Doesnt de-bunk the carbon usage of storage.
But then, of course, you already know that.7 -
Yes exactly, batteries will only get better. Oil will always be oil.cantersaddick said:
And of course solid state batteries which are now being produced in China have far lower mineral requirements than existing EV batteries so at best that is a temporary problem.Leroy Ambrose said:
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.6 -
Love to know how many PHD's Walky boy has gotDiebythesword said:
People working towards a phd aren’t amateurs, they’re usually professional academics.MrWalker said:
So, as you already know everything, where does your chosen article, written by a rank amateur, debunk the idea that pointless storage consumes CO2?Leroy Ambrose said:
Of course I've read thw article. That's why I found an article refuting the nonsense of the headline. The methodology is inherently flawed - and the ludicrous headline is designed to obfuscate the real problem (fossil fuels are fucking up the environment).MrWalker said:
De bunked by someone 'working towards' a PhdLeroy Ambrose said:
Debunked as clickbait nonsense years ago:MrWalker said:Duplicate and unwanted photos taken on Britons’ phones are producing 355,000 tonnes of CO2 per year in data storage.
https://davidmytton.blog/dirty-data-carbon-footprint-of-photo-storage/
OK then
Have you read the article?
Doesnt de-bunk the carbon usage of storage.
But then, of course, you already know that.4 -
Strange how people are trying and find that zinger that proves improving air quality is a waste of time.
It's almost as if they are recycling (!) propaganda from petrochemical organisations.11 - Sponsored links:
-
Thank you for agreeing there is a problem. Which was my point. We have to get off fossil fuels. But not all alternatives are without problems. To deny it is foolish.cantersaddick said:
And of course solid state batteries which are now being produced in China have far lower mineral requirements than existing EV batteries so at best that is a temporary problem.Leroy Ambrose said:
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.1 -
A problem to which the solution is already being mass produced in China and will soon be revolutionising (and I mean that genuinely I've posted in detail about solid state batteries further up the thread) energy storage.MrWalker said:
Thank you for agreeing there is a problem. Which was my point. We have to get off fossil fuels. But not all alternatives are without problems. To deny it is foolish.cantersaddick said:
And of course solid state batteries which are now being produced in China have far lower mineral requirements than existing EV batteries so at best that is a temporary problem.Leroy Ambrose said:
More ludicrous 'the perfect is the enemy of the good' narrative ably supported by vested interests.MrWalker said:Race to mine metals for EV batteries threatens marine paradise
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/articles/c0k36v50zvro
But then, of course, you already know that.0 -
A recent study of studies (a study that pulls together all the peer reviewed evidence on a topic over a period of over a decade to find a most likely case or average result of the findings and is itself peer reviewed as a paper) has been published on climate change. It should be big news but the coverage has been limited.
Below is a few exerpts of bits of commentary/summaries of it. Worrying stuff.
3 -
£17.5 billion paid out each yeah in UK subsidies to fossil fuel companies (out of £7 trillion globally). These are huge multinationals making tens trillions in profit not innovating and not developing new technology or a public good. So no reason for these subsidies.Redskin said:
You can't get annoyed about subsidies on one side without considering the other which consequently are much higher.
https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news/uk-government-subsidises-fossil-fuels-by-17-5-billion-every-year-new-research-reveals/6 -
I'm convinced the same thing is responsible for ignorance of almost all issues (global warming, immigration, antivax, chemtrails etc etc).cantersaddick said:A recent study of studies (a study that pulls together all the peer reviewed evidence on a topic over a period of over a decade to find a most likely case or average result of the findings and is itself peer reviewed as a paper) has been published on climate change. It should be big news but the coverage has been limited.
Below is a few exerpts of bits of commentary/summaries of it. Worrying stuff.
People want simple explanations and solutions for complex problems. The dumbing down of science in education - aided and abetted by the media - is largely responsible for this. We've generated an entire ecosystem on the Joe Rogan school of debate - where people who are absolute cretins at best, or disingenuous shithouses at worst, have their ludicrous 'alternative views' paraded alongside scientific facts, leading to people who lack the cognitive reasoning skills necessary to laugh at the lunatics getting dragged down rabbit holes where they're constantly reinforced in their minds until they become established fact.
Social media worsens the effect - for a perfect example of this, take a look at the Nicola Bulley case. People watch a couple of YouTube videos and think they're fucking Columbo.
I really don't see a way out of this. AI will make it exponentially worse. We're absolutely fucking cooked, aren't we? 🤣13 -
Couldn't agree more @Leroy Ambrose the drivel on social media is appalling and most have no scientific base. Every time I see a post about the weather the contrail idiots start their rubbish about chemtrails and that we are all being sprayed.
The same idiots believe that vaccines are given to control us.
If you try to give a scientific answer you are called a sheep. It's frightening that people actually believe this rubbish.2 -
The only article I meant to post was the one concerning nuclear power. I was completely unaware that the subsidies link - which I hadn't even read - had been cobbled on to the nuclear power link.cantersaddick said:
£17.5 billion paid out each yeah in UK subsidies to fossil fuel companies (out of £7 trillion globally). These are huge multinationals making tens trillions in profit not innovating and not developing new technology or a public good. So no reason for these subsidies.Redskin said:
You can't get annoyed about subsidies on one side without considering the other which consequently are much higher.
https://www.globaljustice.org.uk/news/uk-government-subsidises-fossil-fuels-by-17-5-billion-every-year-new-research-reveals/
0 -
Just reading about perovskite.
Huge development funding in Japan for far better solar panels1 -
Whilst some will stick their fingers in their ears and deny cloud storage has a carbon footprint, or dismiss it without discussion, a bloke probably working towards a GCSE, has gathered estimates here.
https://greenly.earth/en-gb/blog/industries/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-data-storage1 - Sponsored links:
-
What has cloud storage got to do with taking selfies? Which is what your original post was about? Or do you not realise that millions of people don't upload every image they take to a cloud storage provider?MrWalker said:Whilst some will stick their fingers in their ears and deny cloud storage has a carbon footprint, or dismiss it without discussion, a bloke probably working towards a GCSE, has gathered estimates here.
https://greenly.earth/en-gb/blog/industries/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-data-storage1 -
Companies backing up their data is the culprit, not people saving their memes. The more we use renewables the less of an issue it will become.MrWalker said:Whilst some will stick their fingers in their ears and deny cloud storage has a carbon footprint, or dismiss it without discussion, a bloke probably working towards a GCSE, has gathered estimates here.
https://greenly.earth/en-gb/blog/industries/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-data-storage3 -
Ed Milliband is doing a U turn and allowing drilling for oil/gas in two north sea oilfields.1
-
Bowing to pressure from fossil fuel companies in the same way they bowed to pressure from billionaires over taxing non-domsDansk_Red said:Ed Milliband is doing a U turn and allowing drilling for oil/gas in two north sea oilfields.2 -
I mean, that's true to an extent, but companies who DON'T back up their data are going to get rinsed by a cyber attack 😏Friend Or Defoe said:
Companies backing up their data is the culprit, not people saving their memes. The more we use renewables the less of an issue it will become.MrWalker said:Whilst some will stick their fingers in their ears and deny cloud storage has a carbon footprint, or dismiss it without discussion, a bloke probably working towards a GCSE, has gathered estimates here.
https://greenly.earth/en-gb/blog/industries/what-is-the-carbon-footprint-of-data-storage
Like you say, less of an issue as we move more towards renewables0 -
The world is choc full of gullible idiots who reject science and data for sound bite information. The USA and UK are I suspect worse than most other countries. Three word slogans are now de rigueur for every political party because any words used over and above are too much information for the dumbed down society we’ve become to understand or pay attention to. I despair.9
-
Significant progress in carbon reduction in concrete. Looks to be rolled out globally in the not too distant future.
https://www.ecocemglobal.com/revolutionary-low-carbon-cement-tech-can-accelerate-decarbonisation-within-the-decade/2 -
Most of Greenwich was part of the original SK's ULEZ area, So now things have settled down, there does not seem to be much of an improvement, which is really a shame. With all the money spent on bus/cycle lanes.clive said:0
