My ass
- Thread starter Hedgehog
- Start date
Yes I really like this one !!!!!!
She has thermodynamics on her side though.
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 22,718
- Reaction score
- 6,198
- Age
- 46
- Location
- Scotland
- Website
- www.youtube.com
She irritates me... her heart is in the right place though.
I know what you mean, I get the feeling she is smiling and trying to hide it
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 22,718
- Reaction score
- 6,198
- Age
- 46
- Location
- Scotland
- Website
- www.youtube.com
She loves the spotlight.
So I read that China produces 6 times the pollution output than the whole western world does combined. Yet they are "given" a pass in the Paris Accords because they are a "developing" country. Excuse me? They have a space program, nuclear weapons, bullet trains and stealth technology. Time for a worldwide embargo of China until they get that carbon number down.
"A recent study from Brown University’s Costs of War project surfaced this startling fact: The U.S. Department of Defense has a larger annual carbon footprint than most countries on earth. With a sprawling network of bases and logistics networks, the U.S. military is the single biggest emitter of carbon dioxide in the world aside from whole nation-states themselves. “Indeed, the DOD is the world’s largest institutional user of petroleum and correspondingly, the single largest producer of greenhouse gases in the world,” the report notes. If the Pentagon were a country, it would be the world’s 55th biggest emitter of carbon dioxide. And its main purpose — warfare — is easily its most carbon-intensive activity. Since the present era of American conflicts began with the invasion of Afghanistan in 2001, the U.S. military is estimated to have emitted a staggering 1.2 billion tons of carbon into the atmosphere. For comparison, the entire annual carbon emissions of the United Kingdom is roughly 360 million tons."
Extracted from an article originally published in The Intercept dated September 15, 2019 entitled: "WAR ON THE WORLD Industrialized Militaries Are a Bigger Part of the Climate Emergency Than You Know"
Extracted from an article originally published in The Intercept dated September 15, 2019 entitled: "WAR ON THE WORLD Industrialized Militaries Are a Bigger Part of the Climate Emergency Than You Know"
The DOD is 55th, China is 1st. So if we add the DOD to the rest of the western world's emissions China would still out pollute the western nations 5.975 to 1.
Lots of what they produce is for the West though. This is probably also a big part of the reason why they have been given more time to decarbonise, apart from being a 'developing' country.
That's a fair point. But they are the largest builders and users of coal-fired electric generating plants on the planet. Even if they installed stack scrubbers, it would still be problematic. The other thing to consider is the deforestation of the world's rainforests. If you decimate the largest areas of CO2 conversion on the planet's surface what is going to happen? You are going to see an increase in greenhouse gases.
She suffers with Aspergers syndrome -- that's why she may come across a little odd.
Her heart's in the right place, her message is very, very valid ... and I admire her for at her age to do what she started -- seeing that it's her generation and her kids generation that'll be really facing the dire consequences of climate change.
She does in particular rub up white middle aged and older men up the wrong way it seems (as proven here again
)BTW: you can't boycott China anymore -- they basically just about make ALL your stuff....LOL.
...and just maybe this generation have a point, that there's more to life than working 40 a hours a week (-- that was an invention of the industrial revolution -- was orginally even wores before workers unions came along) until you fall over dead for some corporation and enriching some billionaire 1 percenter... (because with the future gig economy, automation etc, very few are going to be able to retire comfortable in future)
Like this little story...
An American investment banker was at the pier of a small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellowfin tuna. The American complimented the Mexican on the quality of his fish and asked how long it took to catch them.
The Mexican replied, “only a little while. The American then asked why didn’t he stay out longer and catch more fish? The Mexican said he had enough to support his family’s immediate needs. The American then asked, “but what do you do with the rest of your time?”
The Mexican fisherman said, “I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siestas with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine, and play guitar with my amigos. I have a full and busy life.” The American scoffed, “I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing and with the proceeds, buy a bigger boat. With the proceeds from the bigger boat, you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing, and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City, then LA and eventually New York City, where you will run your expanding enterprise.”
The Mexican fisherman asked, “But, how long will this all take?”
To which the American replied, “15 – 20 years.”
“But what then?” Asked the Mexican.
The American laughed and said, “That’s the best part. When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions!”
“Millions – then what?”
The American said, “Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siestas with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos.”
An American investment banker was at the pier of a small coastal Mexican village when a small boat with just one fisherman docked. Inside the small boat were several large yellowfin tuna. The American complimented the Mexican on the quality of his fish and asked how long it took to catch them.
The Mexican replied, “only a little while. The American then asked why didn’t he stay out longer and catch more fish? The Mexican said he had enough to support his family’s immediate needs. The American then asked, “but what do you do with the rest of your time?”
The Mexican fisherman said, “I sleep late, fish a little, play with my children, take siestas with my wife, Maria, stroll into the village each evening where I sip wine, and play guitar with my amigos. I have a full and busy life.” The American scoffed, “I am a Harvard MBA and could help you. You should spend more time fishing and with the proceeds, buy a bigger boat. With the proceeds from the bigger boat, you could buy several boats, eventually you would have a fleet of fishing boats. Instead of selling your catch to a middleman you would sell directly to the processor, eventually opening your own cannery. You would control the product, processing, and distribution. You would need to leave this small coastal fishing village and move to Mexico City, then LA and eventually New York City, where you will run your expanding enterprise.”
The Mexican fisherman asked, “But, how long will this all take?”
To which the American replied, “15 – 20 years.”
“But what then?” Asked the Mexican.
The American laughed and said, “That’s the best part. When the time is right you would announce an IPO and sell your company stock to the public and become very rich, you would make millions!”
“Millions – then what?”
The American said, “Then you would retire. Move to a small coastal fishing village where you would sleep late, fish a little, play with your kids, take siestas with your wife, stroll to the village in the evenings where you could sip wine and play your guitar with your amigos.”
- Joined
- Nov 5, 2009
- Messages
- 22,718
- Reaction score
- 6,198
- Age
- 46
- Location
- Scotland
- Website
- www.youtube.com
White middle aged man here... (yep I fit that demographic) but I don't side with the white middle aged men who hold all the power. Im all for telling them things need to change... but shouting at them telling them things need to change without having any answers is like pissing in the wind. The whole cult around her seems very well orchestrated and stage managed but has it had any effect... a lot of middle aged men nodding their heads agreeing with her then doing absolutely bugger all about it once she has exited stage left.
Sure, that's a different issue -- too many vested financial/political interests.
I think humanity's pretty much past the tipping point of this thing (even with the massive shift to cleaner energies starting -- we're probably 2 decades too late) ... the next few future generations will be stuck with the job of how to figure out the survival and coping mechanisms/technologies -- and a LOT of people's standard of living is going to get even shittier than it is now... as droughts and floods hit, glaciers melt, and climate and agricultural growing areas die off or shift with 3rd world countries to be in the worst hit zones.
I think our grandkids are going to curse us for sitting on our collective hands to protect our destructive mass consumer society.
Hey, I am all for saving the environment. But if it’s a global problem then global solutions need to be uniformly applied. So China needs to adhere to the Paris Accords at the level the west does. And so does everyone else for that matter.
- Joined
- Dec 26, 2015
- Messages
- 2,138
- Reaction score
- 1,616
- Location
- Ontario, Canada
- Website
- www.lesliesoftware.com
Agreed.
LOL yep.She does in particular rub up white middle aged and older men up the wrong way it seems (as proven here again
Yeah, it sucks. I remember when the kids were small we always bought Canadian made clothing whenever we could. If we couldn't we'd buy US and if we couldn't we'd go for Mexico. As time went on there was less and less available to the point where finally we couldn't keep to North American at all.
I'm a bit in both camps. We do indeed need to change stuff. Climate is a priority, we need to stop using more energy because after a while we can't reverse the entropy. Or so my brother told me, who has the degree to fully understand this stuff.
Most parties with short-term financial interests that will be harmed if we limit 'energy consumption' will try to point to others before starting to do something themselves. So I think it is good that there is attention for the problem.
On the other hand, 'we' are only in a position to worry about the future because we have enough food in our mouths, etc.
I too have the experience (as a middle aged white male) that part of the younger generation is, at least in my eyes, rather spoiled or feels entitled to all kind of stuff that isn't for granted and is 'offended' by everything that doesn't fit their view.
Guess I'm getting old!
Most parties with short-term financial interests that will be harmed if we limit 'energy consumption' will try to point to others before starting to do something themselves. So I think it is good that there is attention for the problem.
On the other hand, 'we' are only in a position to worry about the future because we have enough food in our mouths, etc.
I too have the experience (as a middle aged white male) that part of the younger generation is, at least in my eyes, rather spoiled or feels entitled to all kind of stuff that isn't for granted and is 'offended' by everything that doesn't fit their view.
Guess I'm getting old!
You're right, but it is a sticky point, since nobody can force China (or the USA for that matter) to do anything. The Paris Agreement is built completely on voluntary national ambitions. And this is why Thunberg's jeers and sneers against world leaders are not really aimed at them. She knows they won't actually listen to her, even though some may pretend to. She is really speaking to her own audience - mostly young people who are or soon will be voters. And in that way, I think she has a very big influence.