[hawkinspeter]

From https://www.bristolpost.co.uk/news/bristol-news/extreme-frustration-after-bristol-activists-8913213

[quote=Reclaim Our Community]

“We are a group of young people angered and fearful of the world we are inheriting. The UN estimate 1 billion climate refugees by 2050, how did Europe cope with a mere 1 million Syrian refugees in 2015?

“Irreversible feedback loops may have already been triggered, or will soon be set off: through the destruction and retreat of the Amazon rainforest, the melting of permafrost in the Artic circle and the bleaching of coral reefs. This could lead to spiralling ecological collapse.

“By now, everyone agrees that the climate crisis is immediate, grave and caused by human activity. Although our means of tackling this issue are not unified.

“After pursuing many democratic avenues in an attempt to affect change: writing to MPs, attending dozens of peaceful protests, working with the Green Party. No real change has occurred.

“In fact we see the opposite: we see the government support 100 new licenses for oil and gas, which led the Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee to say that “the Government has no coordinated plan towards achieving the net zero emissions by 2050 target”. We are left with no other option. If the institutions of power will not affect the necessary change, we must do so ourselves.”[/quote]

Topic

[levestane]

There are folk on the right

There are folk on the right of politics trying to do the right thing.

[Anonymous]

@Right_is_for_Dickheads
@Right_is_for_Dickheads

[morgoth985]

All growth isn’t necessarily

All growth isn’t necessarily so associated but a lot is, because it assumes infinite planetary resources.  Last time I checked we didn’t have those.

[levestane]

Secret_squirrel wrote:

Please show your working where all growth is associated with an increased ecological footprint. 
That’s a flawed assumption. 

It is up to those promoting growth to prove this could be done without increasing ecological footprint, and preferably whilst halving the footprint to return to sustainability. Mass transportation cycling could play a significant role.

Looks like 1.5°C is toast.

[wycombewheeler]

Geoff Ingram wrote:

They all park in a circle for defensive purposes when hordes of eco protesters attack.

I thought it was to stop stowaways before boarding the cross channel ferry.

[wycombewheeler]

brooksby wrote:

I wonder what the Artic circle is?  Is it where they build or store HGVs?

space needed for turning round, see also “turning circle”

[wycombewheeler]

chrisonatrike wrote:

A technological example: though powerplants have become more efficient and components have got lighter, over the decades cars have stayed the same weight or got heavier** and require even more resources to make.

safety systems – air bags abs, improved door pillars, better impact protection

convenience – motors where previously manual adjustment was common, air conditioning

space – larger cars

more power – engines are more efficient but the 100 BHP engines common years ago are no longer common. In 1999 I got a company car (corsa) with 55 BHP, I bet nothing has such a small engine now.

[Left_is_for_Losers]

Idiots. Why don’t they all

Idiots. Why don’t they all turn their own heating and electricity off for the winter if they want to do something worthwhile to help the environment

[Eton Rifle]

Ah, the Bristol Post.
Ah, the Bristol Post. Presumably they haven’t opened comments on the article, as the ensuing Gammon meltdown would crash the internet.

[chrisonabike]

“Define ‘growth'” I guess? 

“Define ‘growth'” I guess?  If you’re measuring over a rather short term perhaps it’s possible?  For a carefully chosen meaning of growth.  Do you have a counterexample?

I’m not seeing the assumption though.  Discussion of the theory and observations (which seems logical) – yes.

Humans cooperating / conspiring to use less resources over time is possible – but I’m not sure (due to the above) that it’s compatible with “growth”.  (Certainly not how our politicians envisage it…)  Using less is possible, just like it is possible for people to drive more carefully.  If everyone did that it would probably significantly reduce road casualties (though I suspect not to zero).  But everyone doing that is just … very unlikely.

In the context of generally increasing human resource usage I did give a counterexample – but again this appears to be very rare / require some very specific circumstances.  And in my example – after some hundreds of years – resource usage went up as the cooperating culture was violently overthrown.

[Secret_squirrel]

Please show your working

Please show your working where all growth is associated with an increased ecological footprint. 
That’s a flawed assumption. 

[levestane]

Agreed, technology and the

Agreed, technology and the Jevons paradox. 

I suspect that UPFs will solve the increasing lifespan problem.

We are not different to other animals so population collapse after the ongoing plague phase seems plausible. It would be good to have some form of controlled reduction, but your first two paragraphs explain nicely why this is unlikely.

[hawkinspeter]

TheBillder wrote:

TheBillder wrote:

Bloody smug Linuxerati with 4096 codes in a lookup table in their Tefal heads…

Sorry to disappoint, but I just do a search and copy/paste.

At my windows PC, I’ve got a nice clacky keyboard with a built in trackball (I love trackballs ever since playing Centipede in the arcades back in the day), but it’s a US layout, so I’m often doing the same to find a pound sign.

[TheBillder]

Bloody smug Linuxerati with
Bloody smug Linuxerati with 4096 codes in a lookup table in their Tefal heads…

[Geoff Ingram]

They all park in a circle for

They all park in a circle for defensive purposes when hordes of eco protesters attack.

[Author]

Replies