Climate Change - a poll

[jgtuk]

13 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

Dos this not argue the case we need to be producing more of our own oil, if we are consuming more than we are extracting?

No. We need to reduce consumption. 
That was an illustration of the type of oil we get from our oil fields. Most of it is not suitable for our uses. We need to reduce our need for oil. 

[Robo61]

49 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

Dos this not argue the case we need to be producing more of our own oil, if we are consuming more than we are extracting?

If that was going to be the case then you may (but I don't think so), but the UK simply does not have the refining facilities for the type of oil we extract and their is no plan to develope them. In fact it was recently announced that one of our few refineries will shortly be closing leaving us more reliant on imported oil.

 

[MPH]

59 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

No. We need to reduce consumption. 
That was an illustration of the type of oil we get from our oil fields. Most of it is not suitable for our uses. We need to reduce our need for oil. 

 

 

we will, we re doing, its just going to take time.

[leicsmac]

Just now, MPH said:

 

 

we will, we re doing, its just going to take time.

Yep.

 

Time it's not guaranteed that we as a species have.

[jgtuk]

1 minute ago, MPH said:

 

 

we will, we re doing, its just going to take time.

But your other arguments all fall flat. We will not benefit at all from the new licences, any profits will belong to the private companies. We will still be buying oil on the open market and susceptible to whatever price is demanded. The only solution is to rid ourselves of the dependence on oil. 

[MPH]

6 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

But your other arguments all fall flat. We will not benefit at all from the new licences, any profits will belong to the private companies. We will still be buying oil on the open market and susceptible to whatever price is demanded. The only solution is to rid ourselves of the dependence on oil. 

 

 

what lol. i never suggested otherwise,

 

We do however decide what taxes and tarrifs can go on british produced 'goods' and that produced overseas.

 

 

[MPH]

13 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Yep.

 

Time it's not guaranteed that we as a species have.

 

 

We don't have a choice.

 

However, more can be gained by the focus being on some of the larger consumers of oil and gas than a nation that is already leading the way

[jgtuk]

Just now, MPH said:

 

 

what lol. i never suggested otherwise,

 

We do however decide what taxes and tarrifs can go on british produced 'goods' and that produced overseas.

 

 

You actually stated that oil would be cheaper 😂. 
I’m pretty sure that taxes and tariffs won’t make a bit of difference, we won’t see any benefit. 
You could maybe put your source forward so I can see where you’re getting your information that oil will be cheaper and we would be less reliant on the open markets. 

[leicsmac]

13 minutes ago, MPH said:

We don't have a choice.

 

However, more can be gained by the focus being on some of the larger consumers of oil and gas than a nation that is already leading the way

I think that we do have a choice, it's just not one that a lot of people would like and so wouldn't be accepted in a democratic society.

 

Again, speaking personally, while it's obvious there are some nations lagging behind on this matter, this is still a global issue with global responsibility. If the shit does hit the fan, those who are looking around at the world afterwards and looking for someone to blame likely aren't going to be choosy about who they hold accountable. The UK can't just sit and say that they're doing their bit, even if they are - that won't fly.

[MPH]

2 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

I think that we do have a choice, it's just not one that a lot of people would like and so wouldn't be accepted in a democratic society.

 

Again, speaking personally, while it's obvious there are some nations lagging behind on this matter, this is still a global issue with global responsibility. If the shit does hit the fan, those who are looking around at the world afterwards and looking for someone to blame likely aren't going to be choosy about who they hold accountable. The UK can't just sit and say that they're doing their bit, even if they are - that won't fly.

 

 

i agree entirely that this is a global issue. and part of what i am saying is that the pressure should be focused on those who are not just lagging behind, but those tat seem to not care so much.  I didn't mean to imply that we can just be content we are doing our part although i can quite se why people would see ive been saying that.. im trying to suggest that squeezing a faster progress out of us is going to be less beneficial than the massive changes we can get from getting some more countries onboard..

[leicsmac]

3 minutes ago, MPH said:

 

 

i agree entirely that this is a global issue. and part of what i am saying is that the pressure should be focused on those who are not just lagging behind, but those tat seem to not care so much.  I didn't mean to imply that we can just be content we are doing our part although i can quite se why people would see ive been saying that.. im trying to suggest that squeezing a faster progress out of us is going to be less beneficial than the massive changes we can get from getting some more countries onboard..

Fair enough.

 

I think the UK (and everyone else) can and should be doing both.

[Robo61]

45 minutes ago, jgtuk said:

You actually stated that oil would be cheaper 😂. 
I’m pretty sure that taxes and tariffs won’t make a bit of difference, we won’t see any benefit. 
You could maybe put your source forward so I can see where you’re getting your information that oil will be cheaper and we would be less reliant on the open markets. 

Then how do you think we should go about that diplomatically, remembering that we remain the top half a dozen for historical CO2 emissions. Not sure telling China that  they have to make their citizens even poorer whilst we sit on our hands, will cut it.

[jgtuk]

2 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Then how do you think we should go about that diplomatically, remembering that we remain the top half a dozen for historical CO2 emissions. Not sure telling China that  they have to make their citizens even poorer whilst we sit on our hands, will cut it.

Que?

[Robo61]

1 hour ago, jgtuk said:

Que?

Sorry quoted the wrong post🤦

[jgtuk]

Just now, Robo61 said:

Sorry quoted the wrong post🤦

Thought so 😂😂

[Robo61]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 

 

i agree entirely that this is a global issue. and part of what i am saying is that the pressure should be focused on those who are not just lagging behind, but those tat seem to not care so much.  I didn't mean to imply that we can just be content we are doing our part although i can quite se why people would see ive been saying that.. im trying to suggest that squeezing a faster progress out of us is going to be less beneficial than the massive changes we can get from getting some more countries onboard..

2 hours ago, jgtuk said:

 

Then how do you think we should go about that diplomatically, remembering that we remain in the top half a dozen for historical CO2 emissions. Not sure telling China that  they have to make their citizens even poorer whilst we sit on our hands, will cut it.

[MPH]

2 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

Then how do you think we should go about that diplomatically, remembering that we remain in the top half a dozen for historical CO2 emissions. Not sure telling China that  they have to make their citizens even poorer whilst we sit on our hands, will cut it.

 

that’s a very callous way of looking at things. China still remains the worlds second largest economy and its a shame you see that it makes countries poorer as doing their part. I’d just see it as an appropriate way to spend their money.

[Robo61]

1 hour ago, MPH said:

 

that’s a very callous way of looking at things. China still remains the worlds second largest economy and its a shame you see that it makes countries poorer as doing their part. I’d just see it as an appropriate way to spend their money.

What are you on about, it is not me suggesting that the citizens of this country stand still on climate change whilst telling poorer citizens of other countries to invest resources on fixing the problems we caused. China per capita is way poorer than the UK.

 

We also should recognise that one of the main drivers of the UK reduction in CO2 emissions was the exporting of our manufactoring to the likes of China so that we could have cheap goods on the back of their cheap labour.

 

Now if you were saying the countries of the west would be better investing in green technologies in China and India then you may be correct.

 

 

[MPH]

35 minutes ago, Robo61 said:

What are you on about, it is not me suggesting that the citizens of this country stand still on climate change whilst telling poorer citizens of other countries to invest resources on fixing the problems we caused. China per capita is way poorer than the UK.

 

We also should recognise that one of the main drivers of the UK reduction in CO2 emissions was the exporting of our manufactoring to the likes of China so that we could have cheap goods on the back of their cheap labour.

 

Now if you were saying the countries of the west would be better investing in green technologies in China and India then you may be correct.

 

 

 

I have never once suggested we stand still on climate change.i have spoken often on how we should be continuing our transition. I’m saying we are one of the nations leading the way and more will be gained by encouraging other nations to pull their finger out  mainly because of the size of their countries and how poorly they are  performing. Not sure how that can be interpreted as us standing still..

[Robo61]

7 hours ago, MPH said:

 

I have never once suggested we stand still on climate change.i have spoken often on how we should be continuing our transition. I’m saying we are one of the nations leading the way and more will be gained by encouraging other nations to pull their finger out  mainly because of the size of their countries and how poorly they are  performing. Not sure how that can be interpreted as us standing still..

Then explain how continuing to issue licences for drilling is helping in that aim, and please don't continue to claim that would help the environment as I and others have debunked that argument many times now.

[MPH]

4 hours ago, Robo61 said:

Then explain how continuing to issue licences for drilling is helping in that aim, and please don't continue to claim that would help the environment as I and others have debunked that argument many times now.

No, you just think you have

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, MPH said:

No, you just think you have

Just to be certain then, because I'm curious... what is the best way forward to avoid problems is to you?

 

Not looking to ask a trick question, I'm thoughtful about it because while I know the current drawdown looks OK, the simple numbers show that more needs to be done - I'm just stumped for a method as to how that carries enough people in a democratic system.

[MPH]

40 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Just to be certain then, because I'm curious... what is the best way forward to avoid problems is to you?

 

Not looking to ask a trick question, I'm thoughtful about it because while I know the current drawdown looks OK, the simple numbers show that more needs to be done - I'm just stumped for a method as to how that carries enough people in a democratic system.

 

I don’t think there is a single answer that will please everyone. That would be impossible. There’s so many variables involved. I do however think that, on a global level it would be beneficial , ( whilst we continue to make the unfortunately slow transition of reducing our oil dependency ) that nations should where possible produce their own oil to feed their own market.. a side problem of feeding the Russian war machine would also be solved. It IS  possible to convert refineries to process locally produced oil, albeit costly.

 

to be fair there’s a touch of idealism over most ideas because pretty much anyone can find fault or difficulty in most suggestions.

[leicsmac]

2 hours ago, MPH said:

 

I don’t think there is a single answer that will please everyone. That would be impossible. There’s so many variables involved. I do however think that, on a global level it would be beneficial , ( whilst we continue to make the unfortunately slow transition of reducing our oil dependency ) that nations should where possible produce their own oil to feed their own market.. a side problem of feeding the Russian war machine would also be solved. It IS  possible to convert refineries to process locally produced oil, albeit costly.

 

to be fair there’s a touch of idealism over most ideas because pretty much anyone can find fault or difficulty in most suggestions.

Fair comment.

 

TBH though I reckon the single answer that will please the most people in time will be the one that actually allows them to continue to live as they are in the future. Even if they don't think that option is correct and/or necessary right now.

[MPH]

25 minutes ago, leicsmac said:

Fair comment.

 

TBH though I reckon the single answer that will please the most people in time will be the one that actually allows them to continue to live as they are in the future. Even if they don't think that option is correct and/or necessary right now.

 

I don’t disagree with anything that’s being said or needed, I just feel the time line and idealism behind it can be a bit unrealistic. I can’t get behind the “ we just need to be quicker” idea. I think we are on the right path . No one wants to do this slowly ( I hope).