There are times you wonder why you bother.............

[AdeV]

For "adev" - you asked for an honest answer - here is one...........

- you've put a hopelessly naive and incredibly inaccurate spin on things - you should know that ice ages are survivable by at least sufficient people that mankind wouldn't die out, whereas "catastrophic global warming" as is very reasonably predicted if the average temperature of the earth goes up by around 6 degrees during the next 90 years may well not be survivable by mankind, and most animal and plant life - it's not about "it'll get hotter", it's about complete climate chaos, and likely the destruction of the atmosphere.

I may not have articulated myself particularly well (something I seem to suffer from in forums. I'm better at it in person, honest). I'm also not prepared to get into a prolonged : fight (yeah, I know, I started it... I will attempt to finish it amicably below).

1) IMHO, an ice age will be significantly more damaging than you've suggested. Sure, it may be that a few people survive, most likely Eskimos or possibly some who are used to living at significant altitudes. Everyone else will either die of cold, starvation or fighting.

2) I've not seen any predictions quite as dire as yours for warming. That doesn't mean they don't exist, of course... just that I haven't seen them. 6 degrees? Seems unlikely when the currently visible & predicted rises are in the 1-2 degree range - and even that relies on the global average temperature "1800s point" being 14 degrees rather than 15; or 13 rather than 14, I forget which. And it's still well within the error bars of most measurements.

Thank you for your honest answer. Usually, such a question ends up with some meaningless waffle

I doubt we'll blow the earth up (we came pretty close in the 60's), but will probably render it completely uninhabitable - so no, we've not blown it up, but as regards our and the other species we share it with, we've done pretty well in poisoning the whole thing!

Even in the 60s, I doubt we could have done any permanent damage to the structure of the planet. Life (as we know it, Jim) yes; but even an irradiated earth is habitable. Look at what's happened at Chernobyl...

Why do I bother? - because I've been greatly fortunate to have seen a wonderful world, and experienced the miracles of nature, which I would like to do my bit to preserve as much as possible so that others that come after us may enjoy the same delights - and am quietly amazed that people find the empty promises of a consumer society to be more important than the legacy we leave behind - if it means I never fly again or have to grow my own food, go without the internet or a car or our electricity is permanently cut off,  it's all a tiny price to pay...........

It's certainly true that nature is miraculous (see Chernobyl, above). The amount we preserve? I'm not sure, TBH. FWIW, I don't think abandoning technology is the answer. Be it the internet, the car or electricity; it can all be used or generated, in even greater numbers (maybe not the car, so much), without significantly harming the environment; indeed, if we switched to nuclear base-load generation, the environmental impact of electricity generation could be significantly reduced; and renewables could make up a lot of the additional requirement.


I think, ultimately, Planet Earth is simply incapable of supporting 6 billion human beings whilst preserving a significant quantity of "nature" & without having some effect on climate. Whether or not you believe CO2 is the main climate issue (I don't, I suspect you do), it's the sheer numbers of us that is the problem. There will be a big die back at some point, it'll probably be a disease that gets us, long before climate change ever does.

[martin]

Of course it's incapable of supporting gazillions of people, and staying recognisable -it's the biggest nettle that has to be grasped, and fast - as I said in a recent post -

"it's not a question of me, or anybody else deciding "there's too many" - it's simple maths, as explained here by the excellent Prof Bartlett
http://youtube.com/watch?v=RdOk521m9WA - the sooner we do something the less pain there'll be - if we start now, it need be no more than a shift in perception of what's acceptable - like smoking - if we leave it too late................. "

CO2? -  in all likelihood, but it matters not a jot - again as I've said innumerable times, that's just one of the horsemen of the apocalypse hurtling towards us! Too many of us doing too much stuff...........

Many people come out with the tosh about somehow "giving up civilisation" or knowledge - knowledge is knowledge, without draconian measures you can't "unlearn" things - civilisation is what you define it to be- to me "civilised" is lower tech, slower, stronger communities etc, less "things" ....(that we ultimately don't need!)

"All" we need is for people to grasp the simple idea that "less really can be more" -what matters is health, family, relationships- all the rest is "extra"
Do I want to leave a "Chernobylised" earth?  - not a lot!  - especially as all we have to do to prevent it is to engage brain, and do things a bit differently  

[Outtasight]

There will be a big die back at some point, it'll probably be a disease that gets us, long before climate change ever does.

It's already in the works...  Swine flu, obesity, MRSA and other anti-biotic resistant illnesses.  The age of good health is close to an end.  At the moment combination therapy with multiple anti-biotics is holding the line but once the bugs have adapted to that we're toast.  It's back to the Victorian days for us.

There's far too many people now to do anything other than the destructive path we're on.  Without oil based fertiliser and mechanised intensive farming, most of us would be dead already.  It's not possible to go back to some "simple idyll" of country life any more with the levels of population we have now.  The growth in the economy fuels population growth (like agar fuels bacterial growth) and the growth in population now demands growth in the economy in order just to sustain the population.

The only way to break the cycle is with deflation both in population and the economy.  No one's going to vote for that.  It's in our nature to multiply when the conditions are favourable (just like a "culture").

You can cut back and go without this and that or deploy ever more sophisticated technology to keep going but both only delay the inevitable, if you don't curb population growth.

In 50 years, I'd rather live in a world of half the number of people but with the desire to continue advancing knowledge and technology (the only things that truly separate us from amoeba) than live in a world with double the number of people scratching a living consuming the last of the food (like amoeba).  My money's on the latter though as we share 97% of our DNA with amoeba so it's hard to go against the natural drive to consume and multiply.

[pipesmokingman]

I can see WHY the OP asked the question , he like a lot of us out here probably feel much the same , when we see things like the sham of all these world leaders and their entourage flying to some meeting in Copenhagen , er what happened to all this tech ?? why cant the whole thing be done on line ?? , and we see the excess that some in society seem to be able to get away with , yet for the rest of us ?? - ohhh "put that light out " ( actually i wonder when the wardens will start patrolling - shades of "Hodges" " in dads army ) - yet or cities are lit up 24/7 like Christmas trees , , back when I where a lad they used to turn most of the street lights OFF at about 11 pm - whadda we need em on for ?? - cars have headlights , and people should be home in bed at that time of night , not out enjoying themselves eh ??  

then of course we are preached AT by a lot of people - whom i wonder if THEY do so much to save power and become low carbon users

as to too many people ??- well - realistically you AIN'T  gonna stop that anytime soon , - people breed , imagine trying to stop them having more than one kid ( yea i know the Chinese do ) - but here in the UK ?? - the PC / human rights mob would be up in arms , and for the rest of the world ?? , may be spending money on condoms rather than guns and weapons would be the way to go ?? - ( like That's gonna happen ) - to time to get realistic folks , we ain't going to cure this problem , what WILL cure it is what has been doing so for centuries - and that's starvation and disease , the old survival of the fittest , or 2012 ( cure ALL ) - OR that bolide out in space - ya know the one with our name on it

so ,I too sometimes wonder why I bother also, but then at least i can say well I tried - which is ALL any of us CAN do in reality

[martin]

Quite frankly, I don't give a flying fig if they've got to Copenhagen in the most gas-guzzling ways imaginable, as long as they've got there, and they're actually talking to each other, and there's the slightest glimmer of a hope that something (anything) will start to be done. I heard a news snippet this afternoon that cheered me no end - China and the US were arguing that each was doing too little - rock on! - more of that please.......
As for "breeding", as Prof Bartlett points out, the only thing to debate about zero population growth is not "if", but "when and/or how", there is no question, it is a mathematical conclusion, not opinion. As parts of India are already demonstrating, if people are educated, they tend to choose to have one or two children. It need be no more draconian than a shift in "what's acceptable behaviour" - in my youth, you weren't  a man if you didn't drink and smoke, and it was deemed quite acceptable to thump gays on sight.......... over a very short space of time, opinions have changed greatly, and shows that it can be achieved gently.......... (the choice is do it gently now, or accept that in the future, more "unpleasant" methods would have to be used  
As for making economies, and our rulers being totally "out of touch", couldn't agree more....... I reckon the only way is to show the planet-wreckers that less can be more, and can actually be more fun!

[Ivan]

If we burned/decomposed 99% of life on the earth (eg supervolcano eruption or meteorite hit that clouded the atmosphere for several years. What CO2 concentration would be in the Earth's atmosphere? I'm not sure, but I know in Earth's early years it had a lot more CO2, and that level of CO2 today would probably lead to oceans boiling away (Venus is often quoted as a good example). Greenhouse gases could, in extreme, result in a lifeless earth. Whether or not it will is debatable, but if we live on an Earth which has an overwhelming positive feedback system in terms of global warming, it is possible. Most people/scientists are concentrating on the short-term effects (next decade, next century). If we concentrated on the next millenium or ten millenia, then we might be looking at rather more than 6C rise. The one thing that is pretty certain to me, is that if rising CO2 levels are catastrophic, then reversing the trend will be almost impossible.

[pipesmokingman]

in many ways i agree with your views of the "bigger picture" - BUT  the reality at this present juncture is that most people don't care , are NOT prepared to accept changes that inappropriately affect THEIR "lifestyle "  and many see the whole climate debate /global warming  issue as just another cynical ploy by the politicos to screw them for more taxes , certainly this is a viewpoint held by many here in the UK ( cynical lot that we are  )

a recent forum /comment session reference our Mr miliband  ( climate supremo for the UK ?? ) resulted in many pages of condemnation for the whole thing , the problem being that many here just don't trust a word the politicos utter on ANY  subject ,let alone climate change , plus of course we have had the "leak" of the disputed data sets reference the whole issue , AND  see the politicos jetting off to what ( again) many ordinary folk see as little more that a 2 week "junket / talk shop " - when as i have mentioned else where - with the technology available today the whole could have been done "on line"  - so you will see that the PROBLEM is getting a credible message across to the ordinary man /woman in the street

and this is NOT  helped when we see little real effort being made to make the tech affordable for the ordinary person - have loads of petty officialdom thwarting the efforts of those who DO want to try and do something ( planning regs etc - or try setting up a sustainable community ) - then there are the NIMBY ( not in MY back yard ) brigade and "conservationists" who don't want wind turbines spoiling their view , don't want nuclear ANYWHERE  , don't want this , that or the other if it affects THEM in the slightest  ,ESPESIALLY if it affects their precious cars and their "RIGHTS"  be able to go where they want when they want , + ( from the viewpoint of one who no longer drives ) - the trend for businesses to relocate away from town centers - that necessitates extra car use to get to them ( and severely discriminates against the disabled and non car owners - elderly etc ) , partly caused by the greed and high business rates charged by many councils for city /town centre retail space - lack of parking etc

so you will appreciate , that the need is REALLY to start at local level - which is something that those at Copenhagen will not be addressing ,vis the REAL problems with "sustainability " - grand plans are fine , but unless it translates to meaningful action at local level , it IS nothing more than talk .

like wise - for those of us with an "inventive /DIY " bent - here in the uk , many of us would KILL for the surplus and thrift outlets you guys in the states have - every time i watch "mythbusters" and see them go to the surplus outlets I drool ( ooooh let me in there ) - we just DONT have stuff like that here - and there is ABSOLUTLY  no encouragement for the  " garden shed " inventor in this country , we are just regarded as "oddballs " little better than wails and grommet types - the focus being on "big business" and profits - where as we know that with suitable "encouragement' there are many very talented inventors and hobby engineers who would love to contribute - but are there any contests ? - nope  - are there any small "research" grants - nope - will you even get a hearing ?? - nope - if you come up with something will you get rewarded ?? - definitely NOOOOOOOOO  and the idea will probably be stolen and exploited

forinstance ,looking at the area of "community electric vehicles " popular in some parts of the states , I would love to develop something along those lines ,BUT  see above + the rafts of petty rules and standards by the EU and government , health and safety, blah blah blah regulations - would make it impossible to even consider it - on a small scale - yet we blithely allow people to continue using cars designed for 4 people to be used as single occupant transport - when a LOT of journeys of up to 5-10 miles COULD be done in small single person transport systems - heck if I can manage to do everything I need to on an 8 MPH mobility scooter in this city , even to the extent of having a small trailer to carry building materials at times ( plus some odd looks from people and the law , but to them i am just a harmless nutter so get left in peace  ) - then you see my thinking  ??

BUT  what ever i think will change nothing AND THAT is another problem - us "little people" and our opinions count for nothing ( certainly here anyways ) its all about big business - science and political maneuvering and taxes - and WE just don't get listened too - and THERE IN lies the problem ( imo ) - until you get the "little guys" involved and "on board" - then all the yakking in the world ain't gonna change much 

[daftlad]

- when a LOT of journeys of up to 5-10 miles COULD be done in small single person transport systems - heck if I can manage to do everything I need to on an 8 MPH mobility scooter in this city , even to the extent of having a small trailer to carry building materials at times

The traditions of the forum require a photo of something like a mobility scooter with a trailer.  sounds ace.
I agree with lots of everything you write, The innovators on this forum develop cutting edge systems, they are perfected and then the government learn from us and then steal our ideas, regulate them and stop us from using them.
Like grid tie solar, requiring MCS registered installers to fit it to get any grants etc.
ta ta

[pipesmokingman]

and the traditions shall be honored - but as you see i have just acquired a new scooter - the blue one -  and have not yet fitted up the tow bar to it ( too cold to be out there sculling about at the moment - however when i have time - will post photo of arrangement

in the mean time - here photo of daft old duffer on scooter



 

the old one a 2000 batricar - had solar top up - active motor cooling ( the motors on these used to over heat during hot weather and trip out - so added 2 fans under seat to blow air on it - and a few "anti pedestrian" ( read Muppet's with i-pods who would not hear a tank coming - let alone a swift and deadly MS )  devices fitted - like a proper car horn  and xenon beacon ( idiots still walk in front of you mind   )

and YES  you DO see right - we DO have to tax and register them - but only if class 3 ( road capable ) - insurance is optional - but only a fool does not insure these days !!  

the new one is much faster - has a 1000W motor ( compared to a 500W one on the batricar ) - has a range ( reliably ) of over 10 mile on a charge - and will probably tow a trailer VERY well - i am thinking of incorporating a solar top up system on that - or EVEN making it powered ( to negate any load ) - but think more on this must I  - sooooo for one persons transport  round town - what more does one need ?? , it will carry a fair amount of shopping - and i have already strapped timber from the local DIY store to it and got that home ( again a few odd looks -but as i always say "needs must when the disabled drive " 

I have a few OTHER ideas for the new scoot - but not got round to it yet - watch this space  

any ways sorry to digress from the main thread folks

[martin]

I'm only too happy for the thread to take a slight detour off-topic (often the best threads do) - you're graphically illustrating that there is a great deal that can be done down here - at grass-roots level - you're actually pioneering the day-to-day use of practical electric transport, and there's no substitute for living with a technology to get it to work properly!

[pipesmokingman]

thanks martin , I know some fourms get very tetchy if you go off subject  - as you say making tech and actually LIVING with the stuff is usually 2 different matters - as usually the people who DESIGN things ( like scooters ) DON'T  have to actually use them - and if they DID  they would quickly realise the practical problems - i guess its much the same with a lot of things , as the ideal is usually far from what reality allows 

to my mind a most PRACTICAL mobility vehicle , would have tracks , not wheels , and one or 2 do actually exist

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TmzNVIFY--k&feature=fvw

but i want wanna THESE !!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GRPHT9wm5cI&feature=related

ELECTRICLY PROPELLED OF COURSE !!  - but i don't think the authorities would go much on this sort of thing - to say nothing of local shoppers who moan enough about standard scoots and wheelchairs in busy shopping areas ( wait till they need one - be like reformed smokers then  )

so as another poster commented - good ideas often stifled by regs  - and in some cases the ignorance and prejudice of people

recently here we have had a couple thousand people kicking up hell about a waste to power incinerator proposal , the fact it would

save transporting our waste miles

produce electricity for 20,000 homes or so

save on land fill which we have virtually run out of  ...... BUT all they are worried about ?? - pollution ( like that would be allowed ) and the effect on house prices  - so as usual its all me me me and sod the environment YET , the same people would if asked , be very richeous about saving the planet I suspect

we also have a new power station near here ( gas fired )  - and OMG !! a bit of smoke during initial firing up of the plant and you would think it was the end of the world

but do these same people complain about the pollution from vehicles ??  ( they live next to a main trunk route anyways ) - do they press for more electric vehicles ?? - would they even consider helping anyone wanting to develop one with a few quid ?? - NO NO AND NO !! - so frankly folks the BIGGEST problem with all this is NOT  the shenanigans of our politicos - BUT the hypocrisy of ordinary folk in many cases 

rant over ............................. for now 

[noelsquibb]

pipesmokingman,

you'll be Plymouth based then ?

Cant see the locals giving you much room for your motability n trailer but you will get noticed.
There may even be opportunities as a mobile advertising platform 

Reckon you would destroy your back if you spent much time travelling around in that little tracked buggy.
You would feel the smallest irregularity on the surface.

All tracked machines should have a hydraulic arm attached .....


noel

[guydewdney]

I have a tracked wheelchair kickign about - its not used at the moment as the honda petrol engine is too noisy - so am looking at replacing with 12 or 24v electric. Its based on a JCB

[daftlad]

in the mean time - here photo of daft old duffer on scooter

You are obviously a nutter, should fit in perfectly with the rest of us, WELCOME. 
ta ta

[pipesmokingman]

in the mean time - here photo of daft old duffer on scooter

You are obviously a nutter, should fit in perfectly with the rest of us, WELCOME. 
ta ta

ME ?? maize as a coot - its what keeps me sane