# EnvironMENTALS!



## roro (Aug 14, 2009)

Go breathe the air in Beijing and come back to dismiss efforts in reducing air pollution then. It's a serious problem and it needs to be addressed whether we like it or not. What 'climate change BS' are you referring to exactly?


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

Oh yes, pleasse hold me responsible for a billion people in Beijing. The BS that I am talking about is hypocrisy, pure and simple. I am also talking about the use of environmental issues to manipulate people.

Ok here is where I get confused. Don't you ever walk through the isles of your grocery store and realise that 80 percent of what is in there is unneccessary to human exsistance? How many types of plastic wraps, bags, containers, air fresheners, tissues, shampoos, conditioners, detanglers, gels, smellies for body, house, car, cleaning chemicals for body, house, car, artificial foods DO WE NEED? We are told to worry about the methane of the fart of a cow yet what toll and waste of natural resources is expended in the manufacture of JUNK, unneccessary junk, wrapped up in pretty labels telling us that they are good for the environment. By the way most of these things are being manufactured by China because manufacture is so much cheaper there due to the fact they don't have to regulate pollution, emmissions, and health and safety. Do you want to talk about Beijing??

How many people buy tabloid magazines? What is the cost of this piece of gossipy, unneccessary, disgusting and more often than not, wrong, trash to our planet. What toll does Oprah, Ellen Degeneres etc have on our resources if we have to watch what sort of lights we buy, what the hell are those zillion watt studio lights on 16hrs a day, 7 days a week taking from the worlds resources? What about your average car chase, bomb fest movie? Does the fuel consumption and emmissions not count because they are for entertainment? 

I love being told that being a vegetarian is environmentally friendly and that eating meat is bad for the environment. So tell me what vegetables grow in say, Canada, during the winter. Hmmmm not many, golly vegetarians have to rely on automotive transport and electrically run refrigeration to get their food - from other parts of the world!!!!! By the way, in order for a lot of vege to grow well and to be nutritionally beneficial they need to grow in fields that lie fallow for a season. Oops no time, no room to leave a paddock unused for 4 months, oh well we will use chemicals instead to get the desired results. CHEMICALS MANUFACTURED PROBABLY IN CHINA!!

The point that I am trying to make is that when a company like Johnson & Johnson or other major companies stand up and say "I am sorry but we are going to have to stop making crap for you people because it is taking too much of a toll on the environment". Or a person in show biz says although we are going to loose a **** load of money, the environment can't stand us running this studio 27/7 anymore so we are going to be using less air time. Or even a government says well we are going to get less tax revenue but we need to stop the manufacture of unneccessary products. Until these things happen I am afraid I can not take environmental issues seriously. Given the state of consumerism how can I?


----------



## Sissimut-icehestar (Jan 20, 2008)

The volcanic eruption here actually grounded so many flights that in the end, LESS CO2 was emitted that would have been.

http://kajsaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/planes_volcanos.png

Go Eyjafjallajökull!

Edit: My vegetables are grown in greenhouses heated with hot water that gushes from the ground, no environmental damage there.


----------



## wannahorse22 (Dec 27, 2009)

It annoys the crap out of me!!! They say it's "global warming", and the world is going to end...yeah, well those are the same scientists who said 10 yrs. ago that we would be in a ice age right now. I mean really?? What kind of aroggant person can say that _we _are destroying the planet?! They act like our planet can't just go through some climate changes....oh but NO according to those idiots WE are destroying the planet! So I guess we should all go plant a billion tree's and everything will be all better.
Sorry for the rant


----------



## Sissimut-icehestar (Jan 20, 2008)

Quite frankly, what have we got to lose if we just cut down on CO2 emission? Either we are killing our planet and it either slows down or stops. If we aren't having a negative effect when we'll all have better, cleaner air? It's a win-win situation to me.


----------



## gypsygirl (Oct 15, 2009)

what are you talking about..we are destroying our planet.....


----------



## Indyhorse (Dec 3, 2009)

I absolutely LOVE the word fear-mongering!!

Especially when it's applied to proven scientific fact!

I automatically award negative intelligence points to anyone who uses it, particularly on this topic! :lol:


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Sissimut-icehestar said:


> Quite frankly, what have we got to lose if we just cut down on CO2 emission? Either we are killing our planet and it either slows down or stops. If we aren't having a negative effect when we'll all have better, cleaner air? It's a win-win situation to me.


The problem is that the governments that are mandating the lower emmision standards are hurting peoples liveleyhood, wasteing tax dollars that could be spent actually doing something and grabbing more power than a central government should have. Fraud is never innocent and benign. The carbon credits scam is brilliant in that everyone with half a brain can see it for the scam it is but nobody is stopping it. It rolls forward a little more every day. Companies that are forced by the government to buy carbon offsets are going to pass the cost on to customers making the poor people poorer while the rich get richer. 

One of the problems with the climate change initiatives is the "I've got mine but you can't have yours" attitude of the people. The entire continent of Africa is being kept in poverty and war because industrialized countries that tamed thier frontier many generations ago are taking steps to ensure that African countries that could be producing more than enough food to feed thier people are creating nature preserves and not utilizing thier natural resources. That is why they all have to have thier hands out.


----------



## TaMMa89 (Apr 12, 2008)

I think people have affected and still affect on the Earth's climate and that will have impacts everything on the Earth some day, human (and animal) life included. The truth is that I've learnt that at school but I've also learnt that nobody doesn't really know what kind of impacts whole the thing will finally have, referring to your statement that climate has become colder. So it's possible that some places will actually turn colder. I also believe that it's good to make some efforts so we can stop developing like that since none knows what it'll finally cause. Erupting volcanoes are natural disasters which can have huge, even disastrous impacts just like meteors or some other disasters can have too. I still believe that won't make our efforts useless - we can't affect everything; things happens but we can still make some efforts, try to our best and hope it helps even a bit.

I'm still not that radical environmentalist or support radical idealisms like linkolaism (i.e. I don't think the right solution is go to back to mud huts without water or electric, wearing just some furs that you've hunted yourself) and don't believe hysteria or rough blaming helps anyone. I haven't noticed any alarming changes in climate myself and don't have sleepless nights because of it. What I believe is that we have a situation that will perhaps turn a problem in future, we can't know it yet. So my suggestion is just to be rational and pay attention to some small choices in your daily life and hope humankind will have some good innovations in future. Yes I do drive a car, lighten my house when there's dark inside and eat meat etc. and I'm not going to give up activities like that. Instead of staying at home all the time because I don't want to release exhaust fumes I try to drive economically and use car when the distance is too long to cycle or walk or if I'm too tired to walk or cycle sometimes, hoping there will be something else but gasoline cars some day. Instead of staying dark I lighten my house but if I don't spend time at some room I leave it dark. I know it's a way more ecological to grow vegetables than beef cattle but I still eat meat since I enjoy it. I still don't overindulge with it. If there's a organic waste trash can close to me, I don't throw a banana peel to a normal trash can (but won't have horrible repentances if I have to use a normal trash can every now and then :wink.

Moderateness, baby, moderateness :lol:. I think none have to become an ascetic because of the climate change, but closing your eyes and going overconsumption isn't good either. Just live your life and enjoy it, be reasonable and do what you can with moderate efforts. I think there are some parties that should change their way to act more but those are often someone elses but normal people trying to live their daily life.

ETA: And the truth also is that climate will change, despite of it if we do something here or if we don't. It's a normal process. We can just affect on speed and direction of the change a bit.


----------



## kevinshorses (Aug 15, 2009)

Indyhorse said:


> I absolutely LOVE the word fear-mongering!!
> 
> Especially when it's applied to proven scientific fact!
> 
> I automatically award negative intelligence points to anyone who uses it, particularly on this topic! :lol:


Are you talking about the handful of scientists that promote the global warming initiative to get money for grants or the thousands that have no monetary gain at stake that dispute the so-called facts? 

I automatically award negative intelligence points to people that think that anyone who disagrees with them is ignorant or stupid.


----------



## TaMMa89 (Apr 12, 2008)

kevinshorses said:


> The problem is that the governments that are mandating the lower emmision standards are hurting peoples liveleyhood, wasteing tax dollars that could be spent actually doing something and grabbing more power than a central government should have. Fraud is never innocent and benign. The carbon credits scam is brilliant in that everyone with half a brain can see it for the scam it is but nobody is stopping it. It rolls forward a little more every day. Companies that are forced by the government to buy carbon offsets are going to pass the cost on to customers making the poor people poorer while the rich get richer.
> 
> One of the problems with the climate change initiatives is the "I've got mine but you can't have yours" attitude of the people. The entire continent of Africa is being kept in poverty and war because industrialized countries that tamed thier frontier many generations ago are taking steps to ensure that African countries that could be producing more than enough food to feed thier people are creating nature preserves and not utilizing thier natural resources. That is why they all have to have thier hands out.


Personally I don't think mandating lower emission standards is bad at all, it'd be a good idea. Believing innovations, I think that if people really wanted to be creative they'd find their way to go lower emissions and keep still good economy. 

I just think the problem is that this doesn't work in practice, at least with its current state.


----------



## Northern (Mar 26, 2010)

Kiwigirl is right about the movies/tv/tabloids & so many other destructive practices that serve our survival not at all, yet that's all the _more_ reason to recycle, buy green detergent, etc., imo. There's a garbage patch the size of Texas (literally) floating in the ocean; critters get caught in it. Then, of course is the latest oil spill in the Gulf, impacting critters, people, & plant life enormously. Who can deny these problems?


----------



## milkyway12 (Jun 13, 2010)

C02 needs to be brought down in cities for its citizens enjoyment. Global warming isnt what its hyped up to be , of course we are putting more CO2 into the air and it may cause some warming but its not permanent and its not going to cause enviremental harm. If its such a big deal , start making zones in cities and simply PLANT TREES if its that big of a deal. It may be to late to zone off for trees in most cities but its a simple fix.

Also studies from Anartica have shown that the Earth goes through periods of hot and cold. Its just a cycle. Ice Ages are usually the cause of Polar Shifts no matter how miniscule they are. 

For another debate ...i bet the world ends in 2012 to a Polar ice shift conisdering we are actually OVER DUE on a polar shift


----------



## Spastic_Dove (Oct 4, 2007)

Ignoring the political part of it all, I don't understand why you wouldnt want to try and keep the planet as good as/better than you left it regardless of if you believe the world is going to end because you drive a truck. 
We have an effect on the planet. Everything does. And I agree that I'm more concerned about the excess of crap we have than I am a cow fart, but I think we should try and save energy where we can. 

I don't think the world is going to collapse anytime soon. I do think we need to stop living in excess.


----------



## ridergirl23 (Sep 17, 2009)

I'm in school, and theres so many people telling us about what kind of world we want to live for our kids... honestly? none of us could care any less. Sorry, no im not going to bike to school, its an hour long busride because i live in the country, I am not going to stop drinking juiceboxes or anything like that, frankly, i like juice boxes, and the more people blab to me about how im killing the planet with my juiceboxes, the more juiceboxes i want to drink. haha. My mom likes to recycle, theres no harm in it, its so easy, you just have an exctra bin beside the garbadge, and you throw almost everything into it. But the enviromentalists are going after the wrong people, ever noticed itshard to get a fantastic printer that you have your whole life nowadays? my auntie has a printer from a LONG time ago, it works better then any new printer anyone i know has boughten, all that plastic when you have to throwthem into the garbage doesnt help. They dont even fix printers now, they jsut say throw 'em out and buy a new one. Things from a long time ago worked so much better, my mom has a phone that shes has since i was like, 8, she has put it through hell, and its still works perfectly, my phone i got at christmas? i treat it like fine china, and it barely works. I think if people just made better quality stuff that would help. 

But i still dont believe that te world is going to end anytime soon, the only thing that is making the world unpleasant is the way most people act!


----------



## Tennessee (Dec 7, 2008)

I'm with ridergirl23. I am not going to change my lifestyle just because people are ruining the planet. We should have been worrying about these problems twenty years ago instead of freaking out about it now. 

And no. Global warming does not exist. It has been proven to be a false theory, and I never believed it in the first place. 

And I for one cannot respect our government asking people to go green when the biggest spokesman for "going green", Al Gore, has no problem riding around in his big SUV and taking a private jet everywhere.


----------



## ilyTango (Mar 7, 2010)

Kiwi, thank you, that was interesting. I'm going to use the volcano bit the next time I'm cornered in a debate about "global warming".

I'm not going to say anymore, because quite frankly I could go on for weeks about this, and I have. I've engaged in many an argument with my science teacher over this topic. (Needless to say, I skipped most of the environment unit classes-it's just not worth the trouble I'd undoubtedly cause.) 

...Ah! There's so much I want to say, but I think I'd better not.


----------



## shesinthebarn (Aug 1, 2009)

There is more to environmental issues than carbon levels. Ground water is a HUGE issue that many people choose to ignore because it is just too frightening and no one has any idea what to do about it. Global warming does in fact exist - to what extent is hotly debated by different schools of research. Government vs university or privately funded research yield very different results. 
Do I get sick of hearing about environmental issues? No. Whether or not you believe in global warming is up to you, but you can not deny the huge impact the human race is having on the planet. Animal species extinction, the recent dissapearance of pollenators (which are mandatory for growth of crops), ground water levels depleating and being polluted, the state of our oceans and fisheries are all serious issues which must be addressed and can not be ignored.
Because politicians are taking a soft stance on the environment, denying the existance of problems etc, is no reason to to take the same relaxed approach. Be a self-thinker. Look beyopnd the news stories and do some investigating. The issues need to be addressed - now. I'm not completely on board with the carbon tax, but I do believe the government needs to interviene with regards to major manucturer environmental policies and standards. Does it mean I may pay more taxes? Most likely. SO be it. This is also coming from someone who lives in one of the most highly taxed countries in the world.
To address the issue of personal consumption and wasteful products on our store shelves - I believe that it is everyones responsibity to do their own part. Don't use products that are overpackaged. Buy environmentally friendly cleaners. If you are a parent, think about cloth diapers (I use them and they are great. No pins involved, either) get an E-paper instead of the curb side variety. Buy organic whenever possible. Use stainless steel water bottles instead of plastic. Recycle PROPERLY. Reduce your waste any way you can. THINK about the products you buy and weather or not there are better alternatives. You may even save some $$.
Keep in mind that environmental problems affect your HEALTH not just the health of the planet. There are many conclusive studies that link pollutants and use of plastics from everything from cancer, reproductive issues to autism. 
It's a lot easier to bury your head in the sand and pretend that everything is sunshine and roses, but I prefer reality to fantasy.
Rant over from a radical treehugger type.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

Don't get me wrong, I care about my environment. I just do it in ways that are realistic and sensible. What I get sick of is scientists talking in absolutes. The truth is no one knows what effect what is having on anything. Scientists are paid by companies to prove or disprove things. I bet a scientist employed by Coca Cola can scientifically prove that can good for people on some levels. I also bet that a scientist paid by a nutritional food group can scientifically prove that it isn't. 

There have been and will be again natural events that will cancel out every bit of damage done by people on this planet. In the center of the North Island here in NZ we have a very large lake. Lake Taupo has a surface area of 616km - the whole of lake Taupo is a crater, it was created by a massive volcanic explosion roughly 26000 years ago. Apparently the Taupo volcano has erupted 28 times since its first big bang. Its most recent eruption was in 180 CE, this eruption is the largest recorded in history the skies and sunsets created from it were noted by Roman and Chinese observers. Yet here I am living in NZ, trout fishing in the crater of a volcano that was so violent it was felt globally. By the way Taupo is a dormant volcano NOT exstinct!

I remember being taught that Rainforests are "the lungs of the planet". That we get our oxygen from trees yadiyadiyah. Later on in life I have discovered that the net oxygen production of a rainforest is Zero. Trees produce carbon dioxide at night when they aren't photosynthesizing. They lock up carbon and oxygen into sugars but when they die and rot they release carbon dioxide. So if you chop down a tree and burn it you get a one off carbon emmission. However to permanently ensure that carbon emmission can never reoccur, Do Not replace it with another tree. Sorry people every time you plant a tree you are subjecting the planet to a hundred years or more of nightly carbon emmissions. Here is a funny little irony, concrete on the other hand absorbs carbon dioxide while it cures. In fact the absorbtion of carbon dioxide by concrete continues on for at least ten years after it has been laid. Less trees, more concrete = less carbon emmissions.

You see, there is so much science out there but what info do we get passed through the media? The science that is going to allow governments to enforce taxes, and science that corporations can use to guilt us into buying " green" products.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

Sissimut-icehestar said:


> The volcanic eruption here actually grounded so many flights that in the end, LESS CO2 was emitted that would have been.
> 
> http://kajsaha.com/wp-content/uploads/2010/04/planes_volcanos.png
> 
> ...


I'm sorry but I can smell the smug of your emmissions from here! 

So your telling me that a couple of weeks after this volcano erupted that scientists know for a fact the level of emmissions coming from this volcano? Just like that! No one can actually get close enough to really assess what is coming out of this volcano but you KNOW that it is less than all the planes that were grounded! Really? Really, really?? Isn't this critter still rumbling and coughing and farting? I'm sorry but it is this kind of gullibility that amazes me.

Oh and by the way what is growing your veges is geothermal activity. If your volcano expends all the geothermic energy trapped under the ground of your country, the chances are that you are not going to have "hot water that gushes from the ground". Also did you know that geothermal energy is not a finite resource? Enough people tapped into it drawing off it everyday and it will expire.


----------



## amburrito (Nov 30, 2009)

Theres evidence to prove it's happened before naturally, we're simply just speeding up the process. When the seas start to boil then we're in trouble.

I'd do an ENVI major at Uni...you should hear the arguements in the labs!


----------



## roro (Aug 14, 2009)

kiwigirl said:


> The point that I am trying to make is that when a company like Johnson & Johnson or other major companies stand up and say "I am sorry but we are going to have to stop making crap for you people because it is taking too much of a toll on the environment". Or a person in show biz says although we are going to loose a **** load of money, the environment can't stand us running this studio 27/7 anymore so we are going to be using less air time. Or even a government says well we are going to get less tax revenue but we need to stop the manufacture of unneccessary products. Until these things happen I am afraid I can not take environmental issues seriously. Given the state of consumerism how can I?


I'm going to ignore the little rant and get right to the point of this paragraph. The companies have very little reason to stop making things, celebrities have very little reason to reduce air time, and the government has very little reason to say we need to stop manufacturing unnecessary products *unless the public demands it*. Do you know why all these green products started popping up, why the media started running show upon show about the environment? Because we wanted them. It starts with us. Sitting back and complaining that you can't take environmental issues seriously until someone else does the work for you does not put you in any position to be taken seriously at all.


----------



## Solon (May 11, 2008)

roro said:


> Sitting back and complaining that you can't take environmental issues seriously until someone else does the work for you does not put you in any position to be taken seriously at all.


Agreed.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

I know we are having an effect. The thing is to stop having an effect humanity has to change pretty much every level of its existance. Stop the production of items superfluous to our survival, not only do they clutter our rubbish tips but the cost of manufactureing them must be huge. We talk about the problems of maintaining our electricity here in NZ yet TV broadcasts 24/7, people work 24 hour shifts to manufacture junk, servos and fast food joints are open 24/7 to cater to anyone who needs something at 3 in the morning. Imagine if we just halved the amount of time that power was actually needed! Imagine what it would do for our energy resources if we only used them half the time. Wow, what if we went back to the good old days when we worked in the day and slept at night. 

I think that for humanity to truly stop this ride we are on, people have to be willing to say "I am going to make some serious sacrifices". But the truth is people like the life of conveniance they are living. As long as every person continues to live the same type of life tommorrow as they are today then nothing is going to change. So I don't believe I need to worry about climate change because, really, whats the piont?


----------



## Solon (May 11, 2008)

Well keep in mind, those jobs that you believe manufacture junk are providing work for people and that junk isn't junk to everyone. 

I do believe that the whole Green fad is wearing thin on people, but that doesn't stop people from doing their parts to make things better.

As far as the science, that changes every day as we learn more and more about how things work with regard to climate changes. There will always be two sides of the coin, those that support the theory of something and those that don't. It's up to people to educate themselves in both sides and make their minds up accordingly.

Personally, I think there is something to global warming. I've worked in state fish and wildlife over the last 19 years and have seen fish population seriously decline and not due to harvesting. Ocean conditions are changing drastically. 

It's a difficult science but there is something definitely happening out there.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

roro said:


> I'm going to ignore the little rant and get right to the point of this paragraph. The companies have very little reason to stop making things, celebrities have very little reason to reduce air time, and the government has very little reason to say we need to stop manufacturing unnecessary products *unless the public demands it*. Do you know why all these green products started popping up, why the media started running show upon show about the environment? Because we wanted them. It starts with us. Sitting back and complaining that you can't take environmental issues seriously until someone else does the work for you does not put you in any position to be taken seriously at all.


Yeah! that is my Point Exactly! I do not ask for these things! People think that by tuning in to watch a show about the environment that is a good thing but what would be better would be if people decide to not turn on telly at all. The bit that gets to me is the fact that ordinary people shop carefully looking for the most environmentally friendly air freshener but don't ask do I need air freshener it at all? 

What I find difficult to make sense of is the fact that large companies pay emmission taxes and buy carbon credits INSTEAD of having to stop the manufacture of wasteful, pointless products that create rubbish and pollution. As if that is some kind of solution. 

I have to say that "well its what the people want" argument is no argument at all. There are government bodies paid millions of tax payer dollars to "find ways to save the environment" but they wont stop the production of a pointless product because there is a market for it. It seems strange to me that a governing body can get ingrediants which are deemed bad for our health removed from foods. Yet items that have no purpose AT ALL and are very bad for our environment are massed produced and **** the consequences. The difference is that things that create health problems in people end up costing insurance companies and governments a lot of money in health bills. Whereas the mass production of consumer driven crap creates **** loads of money for lots of wealthy people.

And I don't understand why people aren't as disgusted by the rubbish we are surrounded by as I am. I am on a public forum trying to get people to think about what they buy, to evaluate the products they surround themselves with. To think about the cost to the environment the manufacture of some of the little things that make your life a little more 'civilized' take on the planet. 

I also want people to think about how they use products. Here is one little example. Shampoo/conditioner. How often does the average woman wash her hair? Most of my friends wash thier hair either everyday or every other day. I am the only woman I know who washes her hair once a week or longer, in the summer if I am swimming a lot I may go for weeks with out washing my hair. Do you know what is funny? My hair never gets oily, never gets smelly, never gets tangled (I NEVER brush my hair either by the way) and my friends can not understand why my hair is always so shiny and lovely. It is simple: excessive hair washing is bad for your scalp, on one hand it stimulates the over production of hair oil and on the other hand the chemicals in shampoos strip all the natural conditioners from your hair. And then think about all those chemicals that get washed down the drain by millions of woman EVERYDAY, chemicals that have to go somewhere. And then think about those empty shampoo bottles going to the tip. A bottle of shampoo and conditioner lasts my family months. How about you? How much shampoo do you use? It may be a small thing but every little thing counts.


----------



## Northern (Mar 26, 2010)

I'm a weekly hair-washer. Think of the water you save by weekly, too! Speaking of unnecessary water usage, lawns/golf courses really suck it up.


----------



## Sissimut-icehestar (Jan 20, 2008)

kiwigirl said:


> I'm sorry but I can smell the smug of your emmissions from here!
> 
> So your telling me that a couple of weeks after this volcano erupted that scientists know for a fact the level of emmissions coming from this volcano? Just like that! No one can actually get close enough to really assess what is coming out of this volcano but you KNOW that it is less than all the planes that were grounded! Really? Really, really?? Isn't this critter still rumbling and coughing and farting? I'm sorry but it is this kind of gullibility that amazes me.
> 
> Oh and by the way what is growing your veges is geothermal activity. If your volcano expends all the geothermic energy trapped under the ground of your country, the chances are that you are not going to have "hot water that gushes from the ground". Also did you know that geothermal energy is not a finite resource? Enough people tapped into it drawing off it everyday and it will expire.


Quite frankly, I don't think you know what you are talking about. This is not the first volcanic eruption we have had so the numbers are an estimated from previous experience. Even if there is an error, there is such a huge difference between the two numbers that there still would have been a difference. 

The volcano stopped a while ago, however the last time it erupted it was on and off so you never know.

Also, I live in one of the most geologically active places on earth. We are both situated on the middle of the Mid-Atlantic ridge and on the Iceland hotspot. We are not gonna run out of geothermal energy any time soon. And yes, I have studied energy sources so I do infact know that it is not a finite source but it is the far best we can use at the moment. The earth isn't gonna run out of heat any time soon.


----------



## Solon (May 11, 2008)

Well said reply Sissimut.


----------



## shmurmer4 (Dec 27, 2008)

meh. Soon (thousands of years) we will all be dead anyways... we cannot kill earth, there are cycles it must evolve and go with.


----------



## smrobs (Jul 30, 2008)

I am gonna keep my old '86 chevy truck because it gets better gas mileage than some of the newer ones. Plus, it's already paid for. I'm not terribly concerned about over-using water either. Guess what, our planet is like 73% water and no matter what we do, that won't change because it's not like it turns to steam and floats away into the universe. The atmosphere keeps all our water here and it is the nature of things that it gets re-used through the process of evaporation/condensation. I don't leave lights on in my house, not because I am worried about the fate of the world, but because I don't want a $200 electric bill.

Face it folks, the world is gonna end eventually, no matter what we do. The best that we can do is try to keep it as clean as we are able while we are here. Does that mean that we have to spend thousands of dollars on "green" items? No. Just make use of a recycling plant occasionally and use everthing in moderation. Everyone is so concerned about global warming but if you look back into the history of the world, it is nothing more than a cycle. The world will warm up gradually over thousands and thousands of years and eventually, something will happen to trigger a cooling trend (aka, ice age). Sometimes it is something like a hugely massive volcanic explosion, other times it just seems to happen for no obvious reason. 

It kinda bothers me when people gripe about my old truck or what kind of lightbulbs I use when the entire world is just sitting back as a BP pipeline pumps billions and billions of gallons of oil into the gulf every day. Why aren't the worlds greatest minds in a room figuring out what to do about that? BP is involved in a gazillion dollar industry and something like this is a certainty at some point or another. Why didn't they already have a plan, and a backup plan, and a backup plan for the backup plan? Why has it been pumping for over 2 months and, last I heard, they were expecting it to be August before they _might_ get it stopped?

Something like that really does have the potential to destroy our way of life. How many thousands of species are going to go extinct because of this? Each one that does has a direct impact on the balance of the food chain. This oil contaminates the oceans, the fish go extinct, so everyone turns to beef and chicken for meat. Is there enough cows and chickens in the world to feed the sudden influx of previously fish-only eaters? How many people would starve in the years that it would take to raise the supply to a sufficient level?

For some reason, changing my lightbulbs and buying a prius just doesn't seem so important in comparison to something like that.


----------



## Solon (May 11, 2008)

The oil nightmare is going to cause problems for years and years. It was sad to think of the Minerals division being in bed with the oil companies and that should have been found out long before a disaster like this happened.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

Sissimut-icehestar said:


> Quite frankly, I don't think you know what you are talking about. This is not the first volcanic eruption we have had so the numbers are an estimated from previous experience. Even if there is an error, there is such a huge difference between the two numbers that there still would have been a difference.
> 
> The volcano stopped a while ago, however the last time it erupted it was on and off so you never know.
> 
> Also, I live in one of the most geologically active places on earth. We are both situated on the middle of the Mid-Atlantic ridge and on the Iceland hotspot. We are not gonna run out of geothermal energy any time soon. And yes, I have studied energy sources so I do infact know that it is not a finite source but it is the far best we can use at the moment. The earth isn't gonna run out of heat any time soon.


Thanks for your reply. I would like to know how you guys are taught about your geothermal assets and how you are allowed to use them. A large part of our North island is volcanic, we have Mount Ruapehu, which likes to cough and sneeze every once in a while. Our Central Plateau is strongly geothermic and is utilised for both power and tourism. A few years back there was a media 'expose' on the evils of harnessing the power of geothermal activity. This investigation proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that by tapping in to that natural resource we are disturbing and destroying an amazing natural resource. The whole area was given a time frame for how long all that steam and heat was going to last. In order to compensate for this imminent demise, local government put on a new surcharge for all those using this resource - because naturaly there is nothing like money to make hot air last longer! Now any type of utilisation of gerthermic energy is highly regulated and very expensive. I am genuinely curious as to your countries attitude toward your geothermic asset. Here it is regarded as something that will dissapear overnight given the chance, how about you guys?

When Ruapehu goes off it doesn't disturb air traffic but it really bums out the skiers!


----------



## Sissimut-icehestar (Jan 20, 2008)

kiwigirl said:


> Thanks for your reply. I would like to know how you guys are taught about your geothermal assets and how you are allowed to use them. A large part of our North island is volcanic, we have Mount Ruapehu, which likes to cough and sneeze every once in a while. Our Central Plateau is strongly geothermic and is utilised for both power and tourism. A few years back there was a media 'expose' on the evils of harnessing the power of geothermal activity. This investigation proved beyond any shadow of a doubt that by tapping in to that natural resource we are disturbing and destroying an amazing natural resource. The whole area was given a time frame for how long all that steam and heat was going to last. In order to compensate for this imminent demise, local government put on a new surcharge for all those using this resource - because naturaly there is nothing like money to make hot air last longer! Now any type of utilisation of gerthermic energy is highly regulated and very expensive. I am genuinely curious as to your countries attitude toward your geothermic asset. Here it is regarded as something that will dissapear overnight given the chance, how about you guys?
> 
> When Ruapehu goes off it doesn't disturb air traffic but it really bums out the skiers!


The thing about Eyjafjallajökull's eruption was that it happened under a glacier so the lava came into contact with a lot of water. That caused explosions which shot the ash into the air and hindered air traffic.

Geothermal power is something we will continue on using as long as we can, the trick is to not overuse the areas. We are not a very populous country and also have other means of getting electricity (hydroelectricity) so we do not need as much as most other countries.
This is all heavily regulated of course and research for Hellisheiðarvirkjun e.g. began over a decade before it was built.


----------



## Allison Finch (Oct 21, 2009)

milkyway12 said:


> C02 needs to be brought down in cities for its citizens enjoyment. Global warming isnt what its hyped up to be , of course we are putting more CO2 into the air and it may cause some warming but its not permanent and its not going to cause enviremental harm.
> 
> 
> *I disagree completely. I have been scuba diving since 1970. I have dived reefs that have undergone dramatic change over the years. Some reefs are completely dead. The cause.....? the warming of the ocean water. Even a couple of degrees is enough to cause the symbiotic algaes to leave the coral's tissues. The causes the corals to starve to death. I have, over the years, seen reefs that are thousands of years old bleach out and die.*
> ...


Yes, the earth has warmed much more than it is now. The ice packs were so depleted, that all of Florida was under water. The difference is that it took thousands of years for that to happen. It gave species a chance to adapt. Now, the changes are happening at a phenomenal rate (geologically speaking). Will there be time for most species to adapt to the change? None of us will be around to see.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

When I started this thread it wasn't to pooh pooh the whole climate change theory. It was to express my frustration at the unwillingness of the powers that be (and lets face it, the general population) to make small but significant changes that may help. A lot of my gripes come from the environmental policies coming from my countries government so probably aren't relevent to the rest of the world. I get frustrated by the media predicting dire warnings of doom and gloom to the point of ad nauseum and then showing 8 hours of infomercials advertising the ad circle pro, and a wonder mop! (when we all know that a good walk and a bucket of water and a rag will do the trick.) I am sorry that my posts have been rants I just see some rather glaring double standards. Save the planet but Buy Large!! 

After reading a the other responses I have come to the conclusion that we are too far gone to make major changes. Anyway how can we? We can't go back in time to the days where a family could survive on one income and one parent could stay home and have a garden and make wholesome food. Life is faster, more hectic, we are so busy we need more convenience. Convenience means more packaging, more preservatives, more manufacturing, more disposables. 

So I am still going to walk through a grocery store and not buy unneccessary commodities which I think are going to end up being blots on the landscape. I am going to refrain from buying hair detangler, gel, mousse, and a myriad of chemically laden body lotions and face creams in plastic bottles. I am going to avoid buying trashy magazines gossiping about the lives of people I don't know and wouldn't believe anyway. I am going to buy foods made in NZ and in season veges grown locally.

And I am going to turn a deaf ear to anymore dire warnings about the ills of the environment because I am doing the best I can in my own little way.


----------



## Solon (May 11, 2008)

kiwigirl said:


> When I started this thread it wasn't to pooh pooh the whole climate change theory. It was to express my frustration at the unwillingness of the powers that be (and lets face it, the general population) to make small but significant changes that may help.


What makes you think that the general population isn't make significant changes to what they do. I see tons of people doing small but significant things every day.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

Solon said:


> What makes you think that the general population isn't make significant changes to what they do. I see tons of people doing small but significant things every day.


Actually it was this comment by Roro:

I'm going to ignore the little rant and get right to the point of this paragraph. The companies have very little reason to stop making things, celebrities have very little reason to reduce air time, and the government has very little reason to say we need to stop manufacturing unnecessary products *unless the public demands it*. Do you know why all these green products started popping up, why the media started running show upon show about the environment? *Because we wanted them.*

I think her very last sentance is a masterly summary of the human condition and explains exactly why the human race is in the position it is.

*


*


----------



## alexischristina (Jun 30, 2009)

I suppose I'm one of the lucky few who has a family surviving off of one income, and a stay-at-home mom with a garden producing wholesome food. 

My thoughts on this whole ideal are fairly skewed, but I grew up recycling and going 'green' as much as a family way off in the middle of nowhere could. I believe in global warming, I believe it's a natural process and I believe it's happening -because of us- at a rate beyond out control, I believe it needs to be fixed, but there is no 'quick fix', and people should concentrate on making life for us as a population healthier, and looking out for our own well-being (which, in turn, would help the rest of the world). 

Some people believe in it, some people don't, but the fact remains that if we do nothing to help our planet, it will become unhealthy, so if everybody does _something_ even if they _dont_ agree with your view, or anybody elses, so long as they're helping in their own way who is to judge? The world isn't going to change overnight, all we can do is hope.


----------



## shesinthebarn (Aug 1, 2009)

Maybe it's just my family and the crowd I hang out with, but most folks I know live a green lifestyle - and it is a lifestyle. Over half of the parents I know cloth diaper their little ones. We don't use paper towel, or use conventional cleaners. Fabric grocery bags are the standard here as you have to pay for plastic bags in this province. We get tax deductions for going green in our homes. We all recycle like crazy and compost. We eat organic foods when possible. My family also cans down bushels of produce every summer/fall. I'm really into seeking out envitronmentally friendly personal care alternatives such as soaps, shampoos and body lotions. My fave line is a vegan organic line made locally. 
I guess I'm not so jaded because I'm surrounded by folks who take their responsibility to their planet and their health very seriously. A big point to take away from the entire green movement is that it is beneficial to our HEALTH and that of our families to use simpler, greener products in our everyday lives. And hey, they actually save $$ as well!
I can see where the OP is comming from however, with regards to the overmarketing of supposed "green" products. Just because a label says it is doesn't make it so. We have to be responsible thinking consumers. Unfortunately, some folks don't seem to want to do that, but I am surrounded by great examples of thinking "greenies", so I'm pretty lucky!


----------



## TaMMa89 (Apr 12, 2008)

Solon said:


> What makes you think that the general population isn't make significant changes to what they do. I see tons of people doing small but significant things every day.





kiwigirl said:


> Actually it was this comment by Roro:
> 
> I'm going to ignore the little rant and get right to the point of this paragraph. The companies have very little reason to stop making things, celebrities have very little reason to reduce air time, and the government has very little reason to say we need to stop manufacturing unnecessary products *unless the public demands it*. Do you know why all these green products started popping up, why the media started running show upon show about the environment? *Because we wanted them.*
> 
> I think her very last sentance is a masterly summary of the human condition and explains exactly why the human race is in the position it is.


Put many dimes together and you'll finally have a whole dollar, then dozens of dollars, thousands of dollars...

I think the same idea applies also here. May the change isn't so radical than if everyone went to absolutely green but I still belive it makes a change and is absolutely better than nothing. Like I said, I believe in moderateness. Live, be happy and make moderate efforts to keep your environment clean.

I think that hair wash thing is pretty personal thing. I wash my hair daily just because I feel a way more comfort when I do that (went once-twice in a week wash was when I was kid but it was dirty already then, cannot even believe what it'd be now when I'm adult and my body also functions like adult's body) and I don't want to scrimp too much as to my personal hygiene. Even tho I agree that we would diminish our garbage mountains just with small efforts like decreasing use of wrapping tissues, there are lot of vain packing I know.

Hey, I got a business idea! There's a gap in the market for wholesale of shampoo. You have to set a business in which consumers can visits with their own shampoo bottles and you re-fill their bottles there again and again. All better if your shampoo has been produced from ingredients so natural as possible, I'm sure all green consumers are yours then :wink::lol:. (Honestly, innovative ideas like that wouldn't be that bad. Even the shampoo idea was perhaps... a little surrealistic).


----------



## Carleen (Jun 19, 2009)

I may be a little tardy to this party, but I have pretty strong feelings about this subject so I feel the need to inject myself in here. What I'm about to say may have been said already, I didn't read the entire thread.

The "climate change" fad that's going on right now is certainly over exaggerated and depending on where you get your sources of information, some of what you read is most likely lies to instil a fear in the public.

HOWEVER - there is absolutely no reason not to buy cloth grocery bags instead of using plastic ones, not to walk/bike instead of driving if you're close enough, not to buy reusable water bottles (safe ones!) instead of buying plastic ones, not to recycle. We, as humans, do so many unnatural things that affect our earth whether we care to admit it or not. We owe it to the planet to at least do the things that are practically handed to us.

I won't even get into my opinions on the things humans do which I don't agree with. I admit, I am a hypocrite. But only because society is so "advanced" (for lack of a better word) that it's near impossible to eliminate certain things from our lives. But that's a whole other argument!


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

Here's what I don't understand:
yes, the volcano spewed a ton of CO2 onto the atmosphere and "negated" our efforts BUT if we hadn't cut back, there would be our pollution AND the volcanic erruption in the atmosphere, so we still came out ahead.
_Posted via Mobile Device_


----------



## wannahorse22 (Dec 27, 2009)

This is a controversial thread.....interesting


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

JustDressageIt said:


> Here's what I don't understand:
> yes, the volcano spewed a ton of CO2 onto the atmosphere and "negated" our efforts BUT if we hadn't cut back, there would be our pollution AND the volcanic erruption in the atmosphere, so we still came out ahead.
> _Posted via Mobile Device_


So where exactly are we cutting back on carbon emmissions?


----------



## Nutty Saddler (May 26, 2009)

I rarely listen to the media - they do have a tendancy to either overstate or understate what someone else has said - far better to LOOK at the evidence and come to an informed conclusion yourself.

As of 19 june 2010 the north polar ice cap has 1.2 MILLION SQUARE KILOMETERS less sea ice coverage than the mean average , taken from readings over the last 30 years - if you look at the graph for sea ice area you will see a definate decrease trend in the graph becoming more pronounced from about 1995 onwards.


I am not really worried for our planet - the planet itself has gone through warming and cooling trends naturally - this dosen't mean that I don't think we have some responsibilty this time round . 

What I am worried for is our and many other species that currently reside on this planet - if we do nothing to change our ways then we are headed for extinction - I studied biology in school and one thing is for a fact - whenever you get a runnaway population in any species there will come a time when there will not be enough food to feed that population - at that point the population will implode - the only question is how many of the other species will our overpopulation cause to become extince at the same time. 

I think that anyone who dosen't think there is a problem is not looking at the facts or thinking of the future , that anyone with their eyes and their minds open will see


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

The life of a recycled soft drink bottle:

1. bottle is manufactured= carbon emission (CE)
2. vehicle transport (VT) from packaging manufacturer to soft drink factory= CE
3. manufacture of product to fill bottle= CE
4. VT to retailer= CE
5. VT to consumers home= CE
6. VT from consumer to recycle center =CE
7. VT from recycle center to remanufacture= CE
8. VT from remanufacture back to soft drink factory to be refilled= CE
9. manufacture of product to fill bottle= CE
10. VT to retailer= CE

The life of a non recycled soft drink bottle:
1. bottle is manufactured= CE
2. VT from packaging manufacturer to soft drink factory= CE
3. manufacture of product to fill bottle= CE
4. VT to retailer= CE
5.VT to consumers home= CE
6. consumer burns bottle= CE

How exactly does recycling lower carbon emissions? Especially when you consider how far your house might be from the nearest recycling center, packaging plant and soft drink manufacturer. That is a lot of transporting empty bottles around! 


I would like to reiterate a couple of fun facts, planting more trees is not going to lower CE, trees don't do what you have been told they do. They do not breath in Carbon dioxide and breathe out oxygen. Trees store carbon gases until they die, when a tree dies it releases that carbon back into the atmosphere AND they emit carbon gases at night when they aren't photosynthesizing. Concrete on the other hand has been proven to lower CE. It absorbs carbon gases while it cures and goes on absorbing those gases for as long as ten years. Less trees more concrete will lower CE! So we can safely assume that a large corporate body buying a piece of state land and planting trees is actually not doing anything to offset their CE or to help the environment (good tax dodge though!).

Climate change has been recorded to happen very quickly indeed. The lake Taupo volcanic eruption put most of the Southern Hemisphere into a nuclear winter. The discovery of Mammoths that have frozen so quickly that they still have mouthfuls of grass in areas of Siberia is also a clue that climate change has happened in an instant. Some siberian tribes feed their dogs mammoth meat. The great flood is another great example of a very quick climate change. Although a biblical story it is also an event that was recorded by several other cultures as well. Including the Mayans who called it the end of the world. Mayans are big on cycles and believed the earth has had many endings - the next according to their calender 21 Dec 2012.

I think it is just as easy to attribute the destruction and disappearence of animal species to the general greed and stupidity of the average human than to climate change and CE. Whole species of animals, of land sea and sky, have been hunted fished and eaten to extinction. Who really knows what the disappearance of a funny bird on a strange island eaten by whalers had on the ecology. Or what holes were made in the ecology of the planet before we even had the word 'ecology'? Also remember that for centuries animals were transported all over the globe as food or pets without thought or care for the delicate balance of the environment they were being chucked into. Not just big animals but all the small parasites and microorganisms that go with them. AND plants (with all their little companions) introduced to new countries willy nilly. In the history of humans traveling the globe remember that quarantine is a VERY new concept.


----------



## Alwaysbehind (Jul 10, 2009)

> People think that by tuning in to watch a show about the environment that is a good thing but what would be better would be if people decide to not turn on telly at all​




It is funny to read people complaining about other people affecting the carbon foot print , etc etc when they have a computer running to post these comments.

Do you really think electricity just appears? In many areas electricity is produced by coal or nuclear means. 

So, if you want to save the world, turn your freaking computer off.


​


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

kiwigirl said:


> So where exactly are we cutting back on carbon emmissions?


I'm saying that if we hadn't cut back, there would be our pollution AND the volcanic erruption's pollution in the atmosphere. Since we did cut back, there is less pollution in the air than if we hadn't.
Every little bit helps, in the end. 
Pollution is a problem, whether you "believe in" global warming or not.


----------



## shesinthebarn (Aug 1, 2009)

So, to the OP, do you believe that we should just do nothing? I'm not trying to be nasty, I truely don't understand your point. It seems a bit all over the map from reading your posts cumulatively.
Is your point that CE's are not an issue and that global warming being affected by polution derived from the human population is a myth or overstated? Do you think we shouldn't recycle? Or is your point that we as a society just need to re-evaluate the products we consume and consume less? After all, the first R in the 3R's of recycling is "reduce", and this is a point I whole heartedly agree with.
Again, I'm not trying to be arguementative, just want to understand your opinion better.


----------



## xxBarry Godden (Jul 17, 2009)

*The End of the World is Nigh
*It would be nice to think that walking to work instead of driving might save the planet but it won’t. If indeed there is universal Global Warming, as well there might be, it is almost certainly influenced to some degree or another by human activity on this planet. 

It would be nice to know roughly how many humans there were 3000 years ago living largely in caves and mud huts but, at most, it will be a few millions, most of whom did not live that long. One wonders why it took so long for us to get here. The human race in a matter of just 30 centuries really has lit this world up, especially at night. If you want to know how crowded the world is then go to Tinnamen Square in Beijing on a public holiday. If you want to know how empty the World is, then fly over it at 400 mph and look down and see how much is barren, empty, inhospitable land. Later in the flight look out the window and gaze down on all that blue, cold, deep water. Approximately six billion humans actually live on very little of the Earth‘s surface - probably less than 20 percent - (someone please tell me). Ants inhabit more. The trouble is we all want to live in the same places. Many of us worship different gods, speak different languages, eat different foods and have different ideas as to what makes a good leader. We do not all think the same but we all love our own kids. Actually most of us would be happy to live out our lives in a house on a hill overlooking the sea in St Tropez or somewhere else equally delightful in your neck of the woods. There is only one Cote D‘Azure.

The fact is that there are always too many of us living in the good bits and not enough living in harsh bits. Some of us live high on the hog; not enough of us live as well as we might. Those living well want to keep it that way and those not doing so well want to improve their way of life. That’s understandable isn’t it? But the politicians, those crafty devious chaps who want to keep the voters happy and more importantly in line, threaten us with dire consequences if we don’t toe some line or another. ‘The End of the World is nigh’ is not a new way of thinking. Currently the politicos have developed the concept of Global Warning which has the advantage that they can charge for it. It can be blamed for many of the world‘s imbalances. Unfortunately be aware that if the Yellowstone Park explodes again one day, as well it might, then you’ve got a few days to empty the deep freeze.

But do not worry, the chances are you will die in a bed - most people do. It is only a question of whose. In the meantime use either Flash or L’Oreal to wash your hair, Procter & Gamble Inc will be pleased either way.
Barry G


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

JustDressageIt said:


> I'm saying that if we hadn't cut back, there would be our pollution AND the volcanic erruption's pollution in the atmosphere. Since we did cut back, there is less pollution in the air than if we hadn't.
> Every little bit helps, in the end.
> Pollution is a problem, whether you "believe in" global warming or not.


 Yes pollution is a problem. However we are being told that it is *carbon emissions* that are creating climate change, pollution is *not* the same thing as CE, neither is over population and distruction of animal habitats - these are seperate issues. What I asked is WHERE have we as a species cut back on carbon emissions? Carbon emissions are being created by economic activity - industry, manufacture and the burning of fossils fuel ie most vehicles. So lets say that an erupting volcano creates LESS Carbon emissions than the 24/7 flying of planes. Do you see any less planes in the air? No. Airlines are *buying* Carbon Credits (not burning less fuel!)to offset carbon emissions. 

If I am beating you around the head with a block of wood, would you prefer I stopped or can I just pay you money to ease the discomfit? If you say you'll take the money, I am going to assume that it isn't really hurting much.


----------



## JustDressageIt (Oct 4, 2007)

All I know is that I try and reduce my emissions as much as possible. Just because others aren't doesn't mean I can't or shouldn't. If I reduce what I'm wasting and polluting, and Johnny down the road doesn't, that fine.. at least one of us is, and at least there is SOME reduction even if it isn't major. If I said "eff it" and stopped cutting back, then there would be my emissions AND Johnny's in the air. 
I do what I can, and that helps me sleep at night.


----------



## kiwigirl (Sep 30, 2009)

shesinthebarn said:


> So, to the OP, do you believe that we should just do nothing? I'm not trying to be nasty, I truely don't understand your point. It seems a bit all over the map from reading your posts cumulatively.
> Is your point that CE's are not an issue and that global warming being affected by polution derived from the human population is a myth or overstated? Do you think we shouldn't recycle? Or is your point that we as a society just need to re-evaluate the products we consume and consume less? After all, the first R in the 3R's of recycling is "reduce", and this is a point I whole heartedly agree with.
> Again, I'm not trying to be arguementative, just want to understand your opinion better.


Yes I did get a bit side tracked. I don't believe that there carbon emissions are a serious problem. There is too strong a money trail to CE regulatory bodies and no actual changes being made for me to believe what I am being told. I am talking about *carbon emissions* by the way. The emittance of carbon gases into the atmosphere by the burning of fossil fuels and industial practices. These are what we are being told is creating climate change. I have been informed on this thread that the 24/7 flying of airplanes creates more CE than volcanic activity if this planet is in crisis then don't all planes need to be grounded for at least eight hours a day? Well no, because airlines *buy* carbon credits to offset the planes emissions. If we are being pushed to the brink of disaster by carbon emissions being spewed by factories then shouldn't those factories have to stop producing so many CE's. This can be achieved simply by eliminating the manufacture of products superfluous to human existance, like soft drinks for example. So apparently, here we are on the brink of disaster and manufacturers still have those factories going 24/7 pumping out luxury items AND carbon emissions. But you see they don't have to change anything because in order to offset their carbon footprint they can *buy* carbon credits.

So no, everytime I walk through my grocery store and look at all the pretty stuff I realise what an amazing scam the global carbon emissions problem is.

Now, just because I think that CE are a cash cow, that does not change the problems created by over population and the destruction of habitats and the problems of ground pollution (although there to, less manufacture of crap would go a long way to solving that problem). They are different issues to the CE money machine.


----------



## Nutty Saddler (May 26, 2009)

The CE trail may lead to a money machine - Dosen't almost everything else as well ? Do you not think that the Oil & Gas industry covertly pay for people to do ' studies ' that convince some that there is not a problem, so that they can still make millions by the continued use of what they produce - some don't care what happens in the future because they aren't part of it .

P.S. the North Polar Ice Cap has now ( 20/06/2010 ) 1.4 Million Square Kilometers less sea ice then the mean average - that's a 200,000 increase in the average melt than yesterday.


----------

