comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 1 minute ago
Boris Johnson says he "acknowledged there was a problem” with climate change 11 years ago in Copenhagen.

Here’s what he wrote as recently as 2015.

https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/1455153285002899462?s=21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Better get your arm bands ready

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPE - Let's Go Brandon (U22712)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPErson (U22712)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by De Gea's Legs (U14210)
posted 56 minutes ago
@paulwaugh
Modi: "By 2070, India will achieve the target of net zero emissions..."

Note 2070, not 2050. Lots of countries will think that's a kick in the teeth. Others may take comfort from some of his non-fossil fuel pledges
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Half the planet would be underwater by 2050 let alone 2070
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sink or swim beeeech
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's funny how many people believe these ludicrous forecasts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny or disappointing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am genuinely amused by how po-faced some people are about elitists jetting into Glasgow to listen to sanctimonious lectures about climate change, and reaffirm commitments to pledges they know they can't keep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise with general corporate meetings, I have no idea why these meetings and summits cannot take place online
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah - I mean Xi and Putin ain't going for more cynical reasons than concerns over carbon emissions from flying - but I tend to think this could be done over Zoom instead.

More generally the climate pledges and targets being pushed by the G20 are incredibly dependent on vast personal lifestyle changes, huge compromises to economic growth, and 'innovation' bailing us out regarding green technology and infrastructure.

It all seems very unrealistic to me.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 1 minute ago
Boris Johnson says he "acknowledged there was a problem” with climate change 11 years ago in Copenhagen.

Here’s what he wrote as recently as 2015.

https://twitter.com/adambienkov/status/1455153285002899462?s=21
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Better get your arm bands ready
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am claiming the Brecon Beacons as the site of my luxury seaside duplex

comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 4 hours, 29 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 12 minutes ago
comment by son of quebec (U8127)
posted 9 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 11 minutes ago
And sorry for the very slow reply, I've been busy soldering my clock
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Buy a new one.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It . Errrr.. ummm.... Is a new one.. that I got last Christmas 🤣
----------------------------------------------------------------------
That planned obsolescence you were talking about earlier. Get the latest model.
I'm just pulling your leg. At least you have the right to repair. Maybe check out the new soldering irons.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It's a Nixie clock kit from pvelectronics.

At least building it myself and knowing a little about the circuits should mean I can fix it 👍

comment by NPEEEEE (U22712)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPE - Let's Go Brandon (U22712)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPErson (U22712)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by De Gea's Legs (U14210)
posted 56 minutes ago
@paulwaugh
Modi: "By 2070, India will achieve the target of net zero emissions..."

Note 2070, not 2050. Lots of countries will think that's a kick in the teeth. Others may take comfort from some of his non-fossil fuel pledges
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Half the planet would be underwater by 2050 let alone 2070
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sink or swim beeeech
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's funny how many people believe these ludicrous forecasts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny or disappointing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am genuinely amused by how po-faced some people are about elitists jetting into Glasgow to listen to sanctimonious lectures about climate change, and reaffirm commitments to pledges they know they can't keep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise with general corporate meetings, I have no idea why these meetings and summits cannot take place online
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah - I mean Xi and Putin ain't going for more cynical reasons than concerns over carbon emissions from flying - but I tend to think this could be done over Zoom instead.

More generally the climate pledges and targets being pushed by the G20 are incredibly dependent on vast personal lifestyle changes, huge compromises to economic growth, and 'innovation' bailing us out regarding green technology and infrastructure.

It all seems very unrealistic to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It might be a case of asking for x to get y. The huge compromises to economic growth are my main concern personally, as I have made clear on here several times. The horrible system that many people loathe on here and feel that needs to be completely reworked has actually done and still does do an awful lot of good for the world; it’s not all bankers, billionaires & tax avoiders.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense_comparison-full.gif

For Kloppy re: military budget. So call it $2tn yeah I think that would help.

Insert - what you reckon? Would $2tn keep you quiet for a few days?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having the money is less worthwhile than an actual plan..

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by NPEEEEE (U22712)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPE - Let's Go Brandon (U22712)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPErson (U22712)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by De Gea's Legs (U14210)
posted 56 minutes ago
@paulwaugh
Modi: "By 2070, India will achieve the target of net zero emissions..."

Note 2070, not 2050. Lots of countries will think that's a kick in the teeth. Others may take comfort from some of his non-fossil fuel pledges
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Half the planet would be underwater by 2050 let alone 2070
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sink or swim beeeech
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's funny how many people believe these ludicrous forecasts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny or disappointing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am genuinely amused by how po-faced some people are about elitists jetting into Glasgow to listen to sanctimonious lectures about climate change, and reaffirm commitments to pledges they know they can't keep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise with general corporate meetings, I have no idea why these meetings and summits cannot take place online
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah - I mean Xi and Putin ain't going for more cynical reasons than concerns over carbon emissions from flying - but I tend to think this could be done over Zoom instead.

More generally the climate pledges and targets being pushed by the G20 are incredibly dependent on vast personal lifestyle changes, huge compromises to economic growth, and 'innovation' bailing us out regarding green technology and infrastructure.

It all seems very unrealistic to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It might be a case of asking for x to get y. The huge compromises to economic growth are my main concern personally, as I have made clear on here several times. The horrible system that many people loathe on here and feel that needs to be completely reworked has actually done and still does do an awful lot of good for the world; it’s not all bankers, billionaires & tax avoiders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And as you well know, from repeated conversations no one is seeking to overthrow the system, just manage the extremes.

Social democracy which most people on here advocate is probably more free market than our current government, which regularly and repeatedly intervenes to prop up businesses that would fail in a true free market, or subsidises it's wages.

The only place where it's not free market is in essential services, where people shouldnt have to pay substantially more than a system costs to run, to access a necessity, such as water or electricity, although on the later point I'd love to see a state energy system enter the market and compete with the free market, as an arm's length Non-profit, rather than essentially funding their infrastructure.

But I suppose nuance means your sound bite to belittle the views of others, isn't quite as punchy.

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense_comparison-full.gif

For Kloppy re: military budget. So call it $2tn yeah I think that would help.

Insert - what you reckon? Would $2tn keep you quiet for a few days?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having the money is less worthwhile than an actual plan..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was the opposite a couple of weeks ago?

I agree entirely plan first, money second, then execution.

So crunch time - what is the plan? I know you know that decreasing growth of poorer countries is a cost, a huge cost. So how do we balance saving the planet with saving lives in terms of hunger and poverty?

Ultimately I think it’s this conundrum that is the most pertinent and troublesome; one that i think still remains unanswered.

Klopps idea is good but obviously not going to happen. How sad is that by the way? Defence budgets still being such a priority in 2021? Big boys still calling the shots I guess, money talks…backhanders etc.

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 29 minutes ago
comment by NPEEEEE (U22712)
posted 1 hour, 56 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPE - Let's Go Brandon (U22712)
posted 8 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by NPErson (U22712)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Constantinople (U11781)
posted 4 minutes ago
comment by De Gea's Legs (U14210)
posted 56 minutes ago
@paulwaugh
Modi: "By 2070, India will achieve the target of net zero emissions..."

Note 2070, not 2050. Lots of countries will think that's a kick in the teeth. Others may take comfort from some of his non-fossil fuel pledges
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Half the planet would be underwater by 2050 let alone 2070
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Sink or swim beeeech
----------------------------------------------------------------------

It's funny how many people believe these ludicrous forecasts.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Funny or disappointing?
----------------------------------------------------------------------

I am genuinely amused by how po-faced some people are about elitists jetting into Glasgow to listen to sanctimonious lectures about climate change, and reaffirm commitments to pledges they know they can't keep.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Likewise with general corporate meetings, I have no idea why these meetings and summits cannot take place online
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Yeah - I mean Xi and Putin ain't going for more cynical reasons than concerns over carbon emissions from flying - but I tend to think this could be done over Zoom instead.

More generally the climate pledges and targets being pushed by the G20 are incredibly dependent on vast personal lifestyle changes, huge compromises to economic growth, and 'innovation' bailing us out regarding green technology and infrastructure.

It all seems very unrealistic to me.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
It might be a case of asking for x to get y. The huge compromises to economic growth are my main concern personally, as I have made clear on here several times. The horrible system that many people loathe on here and feel that needs to be completely reworked has actually done and still does do an awful lot of good for the world; it’s not all bankers, billionaires & tax avoiders.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
And as you well know, from repeated conversations no one is seeking to overthrow the system, just manage the extremes.

Social democracy which most people on here advocate is probably more free market than our current government, which regularly and repeatedly intervenes to prop up businesses that would fail in a true free market, or subsidises it's wages.

The only place where it's not free market is in essential services, where people shouldnt have to pay substantially more than a system costs to run, to access a necessity, such as water or electricity, although on the later point I'd love to see a state energy system enter the market and compete with the free market, as an arm's length Non-profit, rather than essentially funding their infrastructure.

But I suppose nuance means your sound bite to belittle the views of others, isn't quite as punchy.

----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ey ey ey calm down there big man.

I think Tam literally said a while back that a new system is needed. Not everything is about you bro, I didn’t say you wanted an entirely new system so chill out with the sound bite accusations eh?

For reference Insert - I’ll take a soundbite outta them apples. NOM


comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - I got 5 on it. (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
The biggest problem in the world is that every economic system is based on growth on a planet with finite resources. Basically driving our own destruction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its called capitalism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Communism and socialism are also based on growth. We basically need a new system and the world needs to find a way to adjust.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense_comparison-full.gif

For Kloppy re: military budget. So call it $2tn yeah I think that would help.

Insert - what you reckon? Would $2tn keep you quiet for a few days?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having the money is less worthwhile than an actual plan..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was the opposite a couple of weeks ago?

I agree entirely plan first, money second, then execution.

So crunch time - what is the plan? I know you know that decreasing growth of poorer countries is a cost, a huge cost. So how do we balance saving the planet with saving lives in terms of hunger and poverty?

Ultimately I think it’s this conundrum that is the most pertinent and troublesome; one that i think still remains unanswered.

Klopps idea is good but obviously not going to happen. How sad is that by the way? Defence budgets still being such a priority in 2021? Big boys still calling the shots I guess, money talks…backhanders etc.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realise that none of the global models, either cop26, nor Paris, etc limit the developing countries in the way you suggest it does, western more advanced economies are expected to reach net zero by 2050, but economies such as China or India have fat less stringent pledges, generally based around their "peak" carbon emissions at a similar time.

I guess the idea there is that once we have met net zero, there is better tech, Infrastructure and supply for them to do so.

Also no, the whole plan Vs budget thing wasn't the opposite last week, Just that you suggested it was such, I don't trust Boris nor Biden to put forward a decent net zero plan, there is insufficient pressure for the to do so, in comparison to the carbon lobby in their own countries.

I'm sure I read the other day that more than 21% of energy consumed globally is to extract oil. Which is a staggering stat

It’s those kind of comments by the way Insert that make me “abusive” just so you know. Was a completely unnecessary final thing to say in what was otherwise a perfectly fair, reasonable and non-confrontational post. Luckily, I’ve just had dinner so I’m chill

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8ZgD4-DVKFk/maxresdefault.jpg

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
For reference Insert - I’ll take a soundbite outta them apples. NOM


comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - I got 5 on it. (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
The biggest problem in the world is that every economic system is based on growth on a planet with finite resources. Basically driving our own destruction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its called capitalism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Communism and socialism are also based on growth. We basically need a new system and the world needs to find a way to adjust.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Tamworth is suggesting a new system with regards to country metrics always being GDP as a measure of success.

That perhaps the biggest driver here

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
For reference Insert - I’ll take a soundbite outta them apples. NOM


comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - I got 5 on it. (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
The biggest problem in the world is that every economic system is based on growth on a planet with finite resources. Basically driving our own destruction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its called capitalism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Communism and socialism are also based on growth. We basically need a new system and the world needs to find a way to adjust.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Tamworth is suggesting a new system with regards to country metrics always being GDP as a measure of success.

That perhaps the biggest driver here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well he’s replying to capitalism then lists socialism and communism then says we need something new….

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted less than a minute ago
It’s those kind of comments by the way Insert that make me “abusive” just so you know. Was a completely unnecessary final thing to say in what was otherwise a perfectly fair, reasonable and non-confrontational post. Luckily, I’ve just had dinner so I’m chill

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8ZgD4-DVKFk/maxresdefault.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are misrepresenting people's views, and you were specifically talking about capitalism and the benefits to mortality etc etc etc

That you have been using in our conversation each day.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted less than a minute ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 38 seconds ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
For reference Insert - I’ll take a soundbite outta them apples. NOM


comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 hours, 35 minutes ago
comment by Thorgen Kloppinson - I got 5 on it. (U1282)
posted 11 minutes ago
comment by Tamwolf (U17286)
posted 2 minutes ago
The biggest problem in the world is that every economic system is based on growth on a planet with finite resources. Basically driving our own destruction.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Its called capitalism.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Communism and socialism are also based on growth. We basically need a new system and the world needs to find a way to adjust.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I think Tamworth is suggesting a new system with regards to country metrics always being GDP as a measure of success.

That perhaps the biggest driver here
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Well he’s replying to capitalism then lists socialism and communism then says we need something new….
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Yeah, I'm only guessing having spoken to him before about this exact issue, but he can speak for himself, it's irrelevant to any point I'm making ATM.

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense_comparison-full.gif

For Kloppy re: military budget. So call it $2tn yeah I think that would help.

Insert - what you reckon? Would $2tn keep you quiet for a few days?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having the money is less worthwhile than an actual plan..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was the opposite a couple of weeks ago?

I agree entirely plan first, money second, then execution.

So crunch time - what is the plan? I know you know that decreasing growth of poorer countries is a cost, a huge cost. So how do we balance saving the planet with saving lives in terms of hunger and poverty?

Ultimately I think it’s this conundrum that is the most pertinent and troublesome; one that i think still remains unanswered.

Klopps idea is good but obviously not going to happen. How sad is that by the way? Defence budgets still being such a priority in 2021? Big boys still calling the shots I guess, money talks…backhanders etc.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realise that none of the global models, either cop26, nor Paris, etc limit the developing countries in the way you suggest it does, western more advanced economies are expected to reach net zero by 2050, but economies such as China or India have fat less stringent pledges, generally based around their "peak" carbon emissions at a similar time.

I guess the idea there is that once we have met net zero, there is better tech, Infrastructure and supply for them to do so.

Also no, the whole plan Vs budget thing wasn't the opposite last week, Just that you suggested it was such, I don't trust Boris nor Biden to put forward a decent net zero plan, there is insufficient pressure for the to do so, in comparison to the carbon lobby in their own countries.

I'm sure I read the other day that more than 21% of energy consumed globally is to extract oil. Which is a staggering stat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so the planned pledges are mostly and almost exclusively for fully developed countries only? So we can still outsource our carbon to other countries for them to manufacture for us and therefore grow etc?

I didn’t realise that actually, no.

This is pretty far from an area of true interest for me outside of writing with you lot about it.

I’m far from well-read on the topic.

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted less than a minute ago
It’s those kind of comments by the way Insert that make me “abusive” just so you know. Was a completely unnecessary final thing to say in what was otherwise a perfectly fair, reasonable and non-confrontational post. Luckily, I’ve just had dinner so I’m chill

https://i.ytimg.com/vi/8ZgD4-DVKFk/maxresdefault.jpg
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You are misrepresenting people's views, and you were specifically talking about capitalism and the benefits to mortality etc etc etc

That you have been using in our conversation each day.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m not misrepresenting anything I’ve just posted what Tam said earlier, if he meant something other than what he wrote in plain English then that’s on him, not me.

Yes I was talking about the ‘what about China?’ Aspect and how we have passed on our carbon usage to other counties, our mass consumerism being totally evil etc, when actually it has helped an awful lot of people.

FML is that right about 21% of global energy is extracting oil? ETF that can’t be true, that’s probably the most mad thing I’ve read in a long time.

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 6 minutes ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 5 hours, 11 minutes ago
https://www.pgpf.org/sites/default/files/0053_defense_comparison-full.gif

For Kloppy re: military budget. So call it $2tn yeah I think that would help.

Insert - what you reckon? Would $2tn keep you quiet for a few days?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Having the money is less worthwhile than an actual plan..


----------------------------------------------------------------------
I thought it was the opposite a couple of weeks ago?

I agree entirely plan first, money second, then execution.

So crunch time - what is the plan? I know you know that decreasing growth of poorer countries is a cost, a huge cost. So how do we balance saving the planet with saving lives in terms of hunger and poverty?

Ultimately I think it’s this conundrum that is the most pertinent and troublesome; one that i think still remains unanswered.

Klopps idea is good but obviously not going to happen. How sad is that by the way? Defence budgets still being such a priority in 2021? Big boys still calling the shots I guess, money talks…backhanders etc.


----------------------------------------------------------------------
You do realise that none of the global models, either cop26, nor Paris, etc limit the developing countries in the way you suggest it does, western more advanced economies are expected to reach net zero by 2050, but economies such as China or India have fat less stringent pledges, generally based around their "peak" carbon emissions at a similar time.

I guess the idea there is that once we have met net zero, there is better tech, Infrastructure and supply for them to do so.

Also no, the whole plan Vs budget thing wasn't the opposite last week, Just that you suggested it was such, I don't trust Boris nor Biden to put forward a decent net zero plan, there is insufficient pressure for the to do so, in comparison to the carbon lobby in their own countries.

I'm sure I read the other day that more than 21% of energy consumed globally is to extract oil. Which is a staggering stat
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok so the planned pledges are mostly and almost exclusively for fully developed countries only? So we can still outsource our carbon to other countries for them to manufacture for us and therefore grow etc?

I didn’t realise that actually, no.

This is pretty far from an area of true interest for me outside of writing with you lot about it.

I’m far from well-read on the topic.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
This is exactly why those who do care get annoyed by the "what about China" arguments, because for years we have shipped our emissions there as a fudge to avoid reducing them.

The reality is that we aren't that forward thinking or innovative as a country, I know of two incinerators being built currently in the UK (one in the neighbouring town, the other where I holiday)

Both are the sort of incinerators that have been used in Scandinavia for 20 years for energy/municipal heat, they are only finally being built here due to the upcoming ban on landfill.

Yet it's not a solution in itself, and it's waaaay old technology, instead of something like a plasma arc reactor to do the same job, more efficiently, cleaner and with useable byproduct.

This is also perhaps a reason I clash with the "Flag-sha**ers" because I can't say I'm proud of this country, that led so much innovation globally now turns to China to build a new train set, using obsolete technology.

We lack basic investment in infrastructure that would make a massive difference in the fight against climate change and massively limit the impact on the average Joe. But further to that we have absoloutely taken a back seat with regards to any innovative technology. Is that a Britain to be proud of? We used to be, and could be so much facking better

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 minutes ago
FML is that right about 21% of global energy is extracting oil? ETF that can’t be true, that’s probably the most mad thing I’ve read in a long time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every year it becomes harder to extract, harder to find, harder to reach.

Another exponentially increasing issue.

comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 minutes ago
FML is that right about 21% of global energy is extracting oil? ETF that can’t be true, that’s probably the most mad thing I’ve read in a long time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every year it becomes harder to extract, harder to find, harder to reach.

Another exponentially increasing issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sure that right but over a fifth?!!!?!! That’s absolutely mental! Can you remember where you read that?

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
comment by Insert random username (U10647)
posted 1 minute ago
comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 7 minutes ago
FML is that right about 21% of global energy is extracting oil? ETF that can’t be true, that’s probably the most mad thing I’ve read in a long time.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Every year it becomes harder to extract, harder to find, harder to reach.

Another exponentially increasing issue.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I’m sure that right but over a fifth?!!!?!! That’s absolutely mental! Can you remember where you read that?
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I can't, a quick Google search shows an article from 8 years ago that shows the growing trend.

https://theworld.org/stories/2012-11-02/energy-costs-oil-production

Might have been a Facebook article on cop26, might have been the guardians coverage..

I don’t think anyone in their right mind would think that outsourcing overseas was for any other reason other than profit margins from cheaper labour. We all agree on that.

The fudging of resulting lower co2 is exactly that but it was an off-shooting and much after thought. The primary reason was just margins.

But regardless of the motivations there were and are positive benefits. Job creation for poorer countries who could offer cheaper labour, allowing them to grow. It came at a cost of local labour, look at all of our manufacturing industry - effectively gone and redistributed overseas.

So it’s actually benevolent wealth redistribution? The poor in this country are veritably wealthy compared to the poor in these cheap labour countries.

(You’ll love that last part 😂😂😂)

comment by Sat Nav (U18243)
posted 2 minutes ago
I don’t think anyone in their right mind would think that outsourcing overseas was for any other reason other than profit margins from cheaper labour. We all agree on that.

The fudging of resulting lower co2 is exactly that but it was an off-shooting and much after thought. The primary reason was just margins.

But regardless of the motivations there were and are positive benefits. Job creation for poorer countries who could offer cheaper labour, allowing them to grow. It came at a cost of local labour, look at all of our manufacturing industry - effectively gone and redistributed overseas.

So it’s actually benevolent wealth redistribution? The poor in this country are veritably wealthy compared to the poor in these cheap labour countries.

(You’ll love that last part 😂😂😂)
----------------------------------------------------------------------
I worded it poorly to be fair.. trying to play fallout at the same time.

The Paris commitments etc were a fudge, deliberately allowing nations we were exporting manufacture too, to continue the rise of dirty energy on our behalf.

It's absoloutely about margins, and stringent, proper global energy commitments would have been a real barrier to that given these countries infrastructure.