Earth Hour?

[Koa]

GP?

[Virgil]

Use a condom!

I'm sure people plan on it, but the statistics show that conceptions increase when people are stuck in the dark.

I find you sometimes bafflingly bizzare!

I take that as a compliment. An individual doesn't follow the herd. I'm living proof that one can be an individual without having tattoos or piercings.

I speak from Experience as oppose to Conventional Thinking.

Have you ever been to India, Pakistan, Bangladesh Virgil?

What does going to those countries that have to do with global warming? All I know is that I want those countries to live in a decent standard of living. It's not my position on environmentalism that condemns people to poverty. I want them to have cars and air conditioning and whatever else makes their lives better. And the same goes for the far east and for Africa and for everywhere else in the world.

You don't have to read any of that to see the changes that are happening.

What changes??? At worst case the claim is that we have increase a degree? How can you see that? It's imperceptable.

In my own city I can vouch for the levels of pollution with 20 years of my living there!

Well, that's different issue completely. I'm for reducing pollution. We had a grave pollution problem in the US and the 1970s legislation has made an incredible difference. I have heard that European cities are more polluted than the US. I don't know if that's true or not, but yes if you got a pollution problem do something about it.

edit: Yes I am from a scientific background.

Ok, good. But we disagree on this.

Nuclear power is not the only sustainable source of energy, Norway gets most of it's energy from hydro electric power; waterfalls and rivers.

Great, I have nothing against that, but Norway's population is under 5 million for a huge land mass. In New York we have eight million people in one city alone. We derive hydro power too, most notably Niagara Falls. I'm not against that. It helps, but it isn't suficient. You made the claim back there that not enough was being done for alternative sources. I disagree. Where electric companies can save money by not buying oil, it's done. You seem to have this impression that we can do without fossil fuels. That's a pipe dream.

Denmark is reknown around the world for it's windmill parks, and is even now working on exporting them to China, I'd hate to seem presumptive, but please do some research.

I've passed these windmill parks (we have them too) and frankly they are as ugly as can be to the landscape. Talk about anti-Romanticism. Be that as it may I have heard that windmills are not that efficient and that they cause a lot of deaths of birds. And if you take energy out of natural air flow, aren't you altering the environment? Aren't you changing the pattern of airflow? Same thing with hydraulic power. Aren't you changing the waterflow and the biology of those river? Yes you are.

Secondly the problem of nuclear waste is still relevant as no one has found a safe means of destroying it.

I'm not concerned about the waste, that gets buried deep into the earth. What I'm concerned about are risks (like Chernoble). But Chernoble seems to be an isolated episode. You Europeans have lots of nucear plants and seem safe enough.

[Lote-Tree]

I'm sure people plan on it, but the statistics show that conceptions increase when people are stuck in the dark.

No. Conception increases when people have sex. It's nothing to do with the dark ;-)

I take that as a compliment.

Off course. All bizzare people do because they don't know anything better ;-)

An individual doesn't follow the herd.

It's not about one's Ego. It's about our future!

I'm living proof that one can be an individual without having tattoos or piercings.

Individual Dinosaurs died out a long time ago ;-)

I want them to have cars and air conditioning and whatever else makes their lives better.

If they are drowned, their land and air poisoned - air conditioning and cars will not make no difference to their lives!

And if you have not visited India, Pakistan or Bangladesh - how would know about what a massive increase in population does to a society? How would you know what global warming effect is having on them?

In far as away as China - Buddha statues that stood for 2000 years are now being eaten away by acid rain!

No. Destroying everything else so that people can own and drive cars and have air conditiong - is so stupid!

[Scheherazade]

R e m i n d e r

Please discuss the issue, not each other.

Posts with personal remarks will be deleted without any further warning.

[Virgil]

No. Conception increases when people have sex. It's nothing to do with the dark ;-)

Oh well, a little dim lighting helps the mood you know. Unless you're a porn star and likes to do it under bright camera lights.

Off course. All bizzare people do because they don't know anything better ;-)

I guess it depends what you consider bizzare. I'm not the one running around like a chicken without a head yelling the sky is falling.

It's not about one's Ego. It's about our future!

Huh?

If they are drowned, their land and air poisoned - air conditioning and cars will not make no difference to their lives!

Lote, whatever may be, the sky is not falling. Please. The apocolypse is not imminent.

And if you have not visited India, Pakistan or Bangladesh - how would know about what a massive increase in population does to a society? How would you know what global warming effect is having on them?

I believe that India had a massive population well before anyone even thought of global warming. What effect is it having on them? Their economy has never been better. Their standard of living has dramatically improved. Or do you want them to them to live in poverty? And may I ask who appointed you dictator of India (or should I call you Raj) to tell their citizens you can't have cars or modern transportation or modern conveniences, while you live in your 21st century world?

In far as away as China - Buddha statues that stood for 2000 years are now being eaten away by acid rain!

That's not global warming. You're confusing subjects.

No. Destroying everything else so that people can own and drive cars and have air conditiong - is so stupid!

I assume you don't have a car. Or air conditioning or electricity or a washer machine or a dish washer or an oven or whatever. I assume your clothes aren't made by modern technology and your food isn't harvested by modern farm equipment. Bueno. Then you must be a monk praying to mother earth in complete fear of the apocolyspe in some sparten four walled room.

[TheFifthElement]

Virgil, you've raised a lot of interesting comments, but I have to disagree with this one:

I've passed these windmill parks (we have them too) and frankly they are as ugly as can be to the landscape. Talk about anti-Romanticism. Be that as it may I have heard that windmills are not that efficient and that they cause a lot of deaths of birds. And if you take energy out of natural air flow, aren't you altering the environment? Aren't you changing the pattern of airflow? Same thing with hydraulic power. Aren't you changing the waterflow and the biology of those river? Yes you are.

Aesthetics isn't a reason not to have windmill parks, personally I think they are beautiful, graceful. The problem most people have with the aesthetics is that they see these plants as a 'blot' on the landscape, but if you put a convention powerplant in the same location it wouldn't be so pleasing on the eye either, in fact I think most people would say less so.

But you also raise an interesting point, though theoretical I also have some concerns about the 'butterfly' effect. I guess there is probably no way, not with current technologies at least, of meeting our power needs without those needs having any consequence; but perhaps we need to use our energy a bit smarter. There are lots of technologies around which combined would significantly reduce power consumption in the average home, i.e. use of heat exchange technology, solar panels, wind turbines, under floor heating, but the problem is that these technologies are still too expensive for the average family to use in the home. What it needs is for the Govt's to push for the technology to be more widely available, and better education for the home owner or how to use these technologies to their benefit, and ultimately the benefit of the environment. I think that any approach will have to be a combination of fossil fuels, nuclear technology, and 'green' technologies. None of them in isolation is a solution.

and Lote:

In my own city I can vouch for the levels of pollution with 20 years of my living there!

where do you live? Pollution levels are going down in UK - when was the last time you saw smog (and I mean real smog!)? Don't confuse 'scruffy' with 'polluted'.

[Virgil]

Virgil, you've raised a lot of interesting comments, but I have to disagree with this one:


Aesthetics isn't a reason not to have windmill parks, personally I think they are beautiful, graceful. The problem most people have with the aesthetics is that they see these plants as a 'blot' on the landscape, but if you put a convention powerplant in the same location it wouldn't be so pleasing on the eye either, in fact I think most people would say less so.

True, but a power plant is one building. These things stretch for miles. What about the forest you have to cut down? We have them in desert areas where there isn't too much of an impact to the landscape. I don't have a problem with them really. They're not in my back yard so i don't have to see them. I can see how in a generation or two people will despise them and use them as a symbol in literature. If they are a net financial plus economically, then sure let's build them. But I've heard mixed things. I guess power companies will determine whether they are economically feasible. What I don't want is politicians forcing inefficient things down our throats to satisfy a whining constituency.

But you also raise an interesting point, though theoretical I also have some concerns about the 'butterfly' effect. I guess there is probably no way, not with current technologies at least, of meeting our power needs without those needs having any consequence; but perhaps we need to use our energy a bit smarter.

Right. I agree. I'm stingy. If something saves me money, I'm for it. If we can reduce the cost of electricity with windmills supplementing power generation, great. It's just these environmentalists who just think there are no other consequences with alternatives. Like if we go electric cars, what about the battery disposal? The chemicals in batteries are very environmentally hazardous. If you have billions of cars with huge batteries, what happens to those batteries when you scrap the car?

There are lots of technologies around which combined would significantly reduce power consumption in the average home, i.e. use of heat exchange technology, solar panels, wind turbines, under floor heating, but the problem is that these technologies are still too expensive for the average family to use in the home. What it needs is for the Govt's to push for the technology to be more widely available, and better education for the home owner or how to use these technologies to their benefit, and ultimately the benefit of the environment. I think that any approach will have to be a combination of fossil fuels, nuclear technology, and 'green' technologies. None of them in isolation is a solution.

Hey I'm an engineer. I love new technology. I do think we can design houses better on heat savings, but some of those ideas just don't pay for themselves. I've always felt that solar power is free energy and we should take advantage of it. But I've seen articles where people have spent over 50thousand dollars to equip their homes with solar panels. And it was calculated that they would break even in costs in something like (I don't remember the exact numbers) in something like 50 years. They're going to be dead and gone, so why would anyone do it? It doesn't make economic sense. I would think if things made economic sense, they would be on the market and everyone would be rushing to save money.

[Madhuri]

And if you have not visited India, Pakistan or Bangladesh - how would know about what a massive increase in population does to a society? How would you know what global warming effect is having on them?

Population control is an issue in itself, different from global warming. We have awarness programs that are helping control the situation, the change will not come overnight, it takes time. This we are doing it not because of global warming, we do it so that people can have better lives at the basic level.

The concern for global warming is for societies that are saturated in terms for development (I think) and are looking for things to save the world. This is not our primary concern. The issues like education, population, health care etc are very important, and in a country like India, these issues take precedence over global warming, things are not as dismal, eventhough, we are a deveoping nation.

I will not go for any power cuts, because as it is that happens without us wanting it to happen. There are power cuts for a few mins, few hours (could be even 10-12 hrs a day), no big deal. So whatever time I am getting electricity, I would like to be in light and not darkness.

If at all because of global warming India is in water, then it will not be the only country that will see the consequence. It will happen all over the world. So, it does not mean that people should be concerned about the issue of global warming so that countries like India, Pak, or Bangladesh can be saved.

[TheFifthElement]

True, but a power plant is one building. These things stretch for miles. What about the forest you have to cut down? We have them in desert areas where there isn't too much of an impact to the landscape. I don't have a problem with them really. They're not in my back yard so i don't have to see them.

I think the approach perhaps differs from country to country. In UK windfarms are generally coastal or on the moors, there's no land clearance or cutting down of trees. Power plants are more than one building. On balance I'd rather have a windfarm:


than a coal fired power plant:


or a nuclear powerplant:


in my backyard.

Hey I'm an engineer. I love new technology. I do think we can design houses better on heat savings, but some of those ideas just don't pay for themselves. I've always felt that solar power is free energy and we should take advantage of it. But I've seen articles where people have spent over 50thousand dollars to equip their homes with solar panels. And it was calculated that they would break even in costs in something like (I don't remember the exact numbers) in something like 50 years. They're going to be dead and gone, so why would anyone do it? It doesn't make economic sense. I would think if things made economic sense, they would be on the market and everyone would be rushing to save money.

I agree with you, but your argument is based on current pricing levels. I agree that the Governments need to act to assist to reduce the cost of these types of technologies if they're really serious about reducing carbon emissions. Solar panels are a good example, they do eventually pay for themselves, and if you were to combine them with other energy saving methods then they'd pay for themselves quicker. The thing is, it'll be a variety of technologies that help this happen, reduced energy lightbulbs (which will be compulsory in EU from 2010), improvements in in-home technology specifically designed to lower the wattage consumption, improved heating systems, etc, etc. The thing with renewable energy sources in the home such as solar panels, wind turbines, is that eventually they will pay for themselves, and then you start to make savings. If you rely on conventional electricity supplies alone then you'll never make a saving. In addition it has been shown that adding energy efficiencies to a home can increase the value of the home by up to 10%, so that needs to be factored in too.

Bear in mind that technology does get cheaper, especially where it's in widespread consumer use. For example, when I bought my first DVD player 8 years ago it cost £800, now I can get an equivalent quality DVD player for less than £50!

Certainly in UK (can't really speak for anywhere else) if the Government were truly serious about reducing carbon footprints then they would plough some of the significant tax income they get from fuel into 'green' energy initiatives, specifically by helping the average guy get the best energy efficiency from their home. Without a viable alternative to petrol powered transport the savings aren't going to be made by reducing car journeys (again, because there's not much of a viable alternative to that either), but considering that currently the price of petrol in UK is roughly £1.10 per litre, 72% of the price of which is tax, there's a significant pot of money there which at least some of which could go towards developing more cost effective solutions.

[Lote-Tree]

Oh well, a little dim lighting helps the mood you know. Unless you're a porn star and likes to do it under bright camera lights.

How did you know? I am Randy Organ. Have we met? But alas I am not gay! ;-)

I guess it depends what you consider bizzare. I'm not the one running around like a chicken without a head yelling the sky is falling.

Huh?

Lote, whatever may be, the sky is not falling. Please. The apocolypse is not imminent.

Low lands of India and Bangladesh already flooded - what else do you need? Whether patterns have changed and changing.

Pollution made in America have washed up and landed on far away places like outer mongolia!

What effect is it having on them?

See above.

Their economy has never been better. Their standard of living has dramatically improved.

Yes for the few. Millions still live in Shanti towns!

Or do you want them to them to live in poverty?

No. But you do don't you?

If not why don't you give away your wealth and resources?

That would remove the poverty?

And may I ask who appointed you dictator of India

Not of India but whole whole world by virtue of Superior Morality.

Not morality of the Ego!

(or should I call you Raj) to tell their citizens you can't have cars or modern transportation or modern conveniences, while you live in your 21st century world?

Modern convienices like chemically preserved Frozen Meals at Tesco's?

Wow so much for modernity!

I don't think they are craving for such things!

Come on Virgil are you for real!?

It's not want of cars and air-conditioning that blights the lives of these people. It is poverty. And poverty is caused by what?

I assume you don't have a car.

No. I don't need one. I give my money to a poor village india so that they start to cultivate their land.

Or air conditioning

No. I prefer the clean air!

or electricity

Yes. Generated by non polluting renewable sources.

or a washer machine

No. I can wash my own clothes. I am not lazy.

or a dish washer

No. I am not lazy.

I assume your clothes aren't made by modern technology

No. I go about naked. I am closet nudist!

and your food isn't harvested by modern farm equipment.

Then you must be a monk praying to mother earth in complete fear of the apocolyspe in some sparten four walled room.

Not a Monk but strive to live an Ego-less life.

And no I have no fear.

But I can see and experiennce. And I see and experience that our actions is having consequences around the world...

Population control is an issue in itself, different from global warming.

Yes. Mads but Virgil and I are talking about two things.

He thinks population increase is not a problem.

I say it is when there is not enough resources availbe to support them all.

And the second is global warming. But the consequecences of global warming to countries like bangladesh and lowlands of india is bad. Areas around sunderbands for example have already been flooded.

[Koa]

It makes me laugh that the first points for modernity in Virgil's mind are two things I loathe and wish never existed: cars and air conditioning.

Of course we need transport but public transport is fine. Air conditioning is for sissies. It's getting common now in Italy so that the past 2-3 summers there have been power black-outs. I detest the heat but air cond is so innatural that it makes me feel bad anyway, and I've been fine without it for a good 18-20 years or more, don't remember when my parents got it.
And I've heard that Africa is hotter than Italy but I doubt a/c is popular...
We're just spoilt. Electricity is needed and no one can question that, but we're taking it too far with our comforts in my opinion (such as I was mentioning the morons not bothering switching lights off etc)

[Virgil]

Low lands of India and Bangladesh already flooded - what else do you need? Whether patterns have changed and changing.

Weather and weather patterns have changed since the beginning of time. There is no significant, in my opinion, link between man made activity and global warming. If the planet has warmed one damn degree ("oh my God, the sky is falling") there are mutliple factors going on, of which the predominant variable is natural. What you're confusing is a lower order effect that if eliminated will change essentially nothing. You're wasting your time.

Yes for the few. Millions still live in Shanti towns!

Oh get off your socialism. The standard of living is improving and spreading across the population, everyone. Ask the people of India what they would prefer.

If not why don't you give away your wealth and resources?

That would remove the poverty?

No giving them my money without changing their economy just makes us both poor. Look how much money has been thrown down a rat hole in Africa. They are quite capable of earning their own living and having the self respect of not taking charity. Your paternalism is stunning.

Not of India but whole whole world by virtue of Superior Morality.

Just like all the dictators of the world, Hitler, Stalin, they all insisted on their superior morality.

Modern convienices like chemically preserved Frozen Meals at Tesco's?

Wow so much for modernity!

I don't think they are craving for such things!

Come on Virgil are you for real!?

No are you for real? Don't put words in my mouth. I never said that. They are free to choose whatever their free wills desire. If they want frozen meals they don't need to get permission from the Raj of superiror morality.

It's not want of cars and air-conditioning that blights the lives of these people. It is poverty. And poverty is caused by what?

Poverty is caused by the lack of industrialization and a free market economy.

No. I don't need one. I give my money to a poor village india so that they start to cultivate their land.

I guess you've been reading Candide. It is not a shock to look at the demographics of population and see that from the beginning of the 19th century when industrialization first came that people have been racing away from farming. Farming is one of the hardest lives you can possibly lead, and you have no guarentee that you'll be able to eat that year. You want to condemn people to a farming life? I bet you don't even garden. I garden, but if I had to live off the garden I would be in real trouble. In fact this proves you are monk. Live by candle light, pray to mother earth, wait for the apocalypse, live off your garden, and the extent of your travels is the next monestary.

He thinks population increase is not a problem.

I don't know how many times I've read in the paper how the population decrease in Europe is a major problem. You Europeans are a dying breed because you don't populate. Population increase is not a problem. We continually increase the efficiency of food production. We throw away more food in the US than is imaginable. Population decrease is a major problem.

I say it is when there is not enough resources availbe to support them all.

Rediculous.

And the second is global warming. But the consequecences of global warming to countries like bangladesh and lowlands of india is bad. Areas around sunderbands for example have already been flooded.

If a person has a cup of coffee in the morning and is diagnosed with cancer in the afternnon, Lote's logic would assume that the cancer was caused by the cup of coffee.

[Virgil]

It makes me laugh that the first points for modernity in Virgil's mind are two things I loathe and wish never existed: cars and air conditioning.

Of course we need transport but public transport is fine. Air conditioning is for sissies. It's getting common now in Italy so that the past 2-3 summers there have been power black-outs. I detest the heat but air cond is so innatural that it makes me feel bad anyway, and I've been fine without it for a good 18-20 years or more, don't remember when my parents got it.
And I've heard that Africa is hotter than Italy but I doubt a/c is popular...
We're just spoilt. Electricity is needed and no one can question that, but we're taking it too far with our comforts in my opinion (such as I was mentioning the morons not bothering switching lights off etc)

You don't have over 35C degree and 90% humidity days in Italy or probably Europe in general. It's quite common here and people die from heat exhaustion. As to not wanting a car, that's your personal preference. I know if cars were denied in Italy the population would go crazy. To many, a car is a) an essential and more importantly b) a means of freedom. There is nothing more free than to drive somewhere you've never been at your time (not that of a train schedule) and go where you want and desire.

[Lote-Tree]

Weather and weather patterns have changed since the beginning of time. There is no significant, in my opinion, link between man made activity and global warming. If the planet has warmed one damn degree ("oh my God, the sky is falling") there are mutliple factors going on, of which the predominant variable is natural. What you're confusing is a lower order effect that if eliminated will change essentially nothing. You're wasting your time.

With you it seems it will be a waste of time because you reject evidence.

Oh get off your socialism.

I find you so bizzare! You demonstrate compassion yet you are all for Ego-tism? People die not because they can't drive 4x4! People die because of hunger and malnutirition, of lack of resource. Not enough to go round.

The standard of living is improving and spreading across the population, everyone. Ask the people of India what they would prefer.

Standard of living is mot measured in being able have air conditioning. That is nonsense!

They are quite capable of earning their own living and having the self respect of not taking charity.

That is why they are poor! Your outlook is so stunningly bizzare!

Just like all the dictators of the world, Hitler, Stalin, they all insisted on their superior morality.

My morality is the morality of compassion. It is not of dictators or Egotists.

Don't put words in my mouth.

You mentioned Modern conviniences.

I never said that.

Cars and Air-conditioning?

Poverty is caused by the lack of industrialization and a free market economy.

You mean like America? And that is why 28 million get food stamps?

No. Poverty is caused by lack of resources. Not enough rersources for everyone.

I bet you don't even garden. I garden, but if I had to live off the garden I would be in real trouble.

Because you are lazy?

In fact this proves you are monk.

That is why I am typing on computer and have a job ;-)

Live by candle light, pray to mother earth, wait for the apocalypse, live off your garden, and the extent of your travels is the next monestary.

I am not even superstious ;-)

How you seen the majesty of the universe in the dark?

I don't know how many times I've read in the paper how the population decrease in Europe is a major problem. You Europeans are a dying breed because you don't populate. Population increase is not a problem. We continually increase the efficiency of food production. We throw away more food in the US than is imaginable. Population decrease is a major problem.
Rediculous.

OK chappy...house the millions of the shanty towns of India and Bangladesh - they don't have any land - so what shall we do with?

If a person has a cup of coffee in the morning and is diagnosed with cancer in the afternnon, Lote's logic would assume that the cancer was caused by the cup of coffee.

When I see chemicals made in Europe poisoning the land and air in outer mongolia...the I say...our actions indeed have consequences.

[Virgil]

With you it seems it will be a waste of time because you reject evidence.

I am too looking at the evidence. The worse case increase is one degree increase in a 100 years or so. the earth over its life time has fluctuate more than five degrees. You can't prove that the one degree increase is not natural fluctuation. Even the climatologist will assign a probablity to the assumption that it's all man made. Those probabiliies are in my opinion hocus pocus with numbers. The fact remains that the earth has increased one degree and that's within the tolerance band of natural fluctuation. I have too looked at the evidence.

I find you so bizzare! You demonstrate compassion yet you are all for Ego-tism? People die not because they can't drive 4x4! People die because of hunger and malnutirition, of lack of resource. Not enough to go round.

At one time 99% of the people on the earth lived with the standard of living you deplore. That changed with industrialization, commercialism, and free markets. That's what changes people's standards of living. If you can't understand that, then we just fundementally disagree. I look to help the world rise from poverty, not be trapped in it.

Standard of living is mot measured in being able have air conditioning. That is nonsense!

It's measured in the ability to spend your money in whatever way you chose to make your life better.

You mean like America? And that is why 28 million get food stamps?

Oh please, everyone who's never lived in this country seems to know everything about us. I'd like to compare the standard of living of those people with anyone around the world. First of all in your country you subsidize people in all sorts of ways. Second food stamps is as much about getting rid of excess food and subsidizing farmers as giving out food.

No. Poverty is caused by lack of resources. Not enough rersources for everyone.

Resources are not finite. Someday you will undertand that.