observer Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 World Enviroment Ministers met at an informal (secret) gathering in Greenland recently; to sort out differences in how to cut carbon emmissions. Currently: Australians produce 25tonnes per year per person; Indians produce 2tonnes per year per person - so who should cut, and should it be on a per capita basis or a National basis? And how do you stop a third of the world's population in India and China aspiring to enjoy the fruits of economic progress, that will involve a greater carbon footprint? And IF today's politicians are serious about the subject, why arn't they setting targets in the near future that they can be accountable for,instead of the distant future, when they'll have passed away? And at a time of austerity in the West, will the rich Nations (that's us!) accept even more limitations on their life-styles? And if your not likely to be around in 50 years time - do you care?! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 That is the dilema and there is no simple answer except to say that all will be revealed in good time and mother nature will utlmately decide for us if we don't strat thrashing out an agreement. If I was you and I'm not I wouldn't loose too much sleep over it as you will have no influnence on the end result. Except of course for using up all the smilies no I wonder how many tonnes they each use up afterall as has been said on this forum recently you've used up more than anyone ese? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
asperity Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Humans contribute but a tiny percentage of CO2 that is emitted to the atmosphere. And the CO2 in the atmosphere is but a tiny percentage (0.038% at present) of atmospheric gas. This is all about control of our lives and raising taxes - a huge con. And, incidently, the evidence is that CO2 is more a benefit to man than an evil. A couple of extra smileys for Geoff. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Down with CO2 - informs me that me contribution is 12.5 tonnes http://www.downwithco2.co.uk/why-bother/climate-change-and-your-contribution/your-contribution-climate-change Seems quite a lot to me and nothing to do with tax or hot air, but in the UK we are each responsible for more than 10 times the global average of greenhouse gas emissions. And whats more those smilies are just adding to the problem. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Geoff, can we survive without CO2? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Geoffrey Settle Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 We need C02 to survive but in the right quantities, you can have too much of a good thing just like the overuse of smilies. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Eagle Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 So Geoff, too much is better than none at all? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted July 31, 2009 Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 I don't think it will matter one way or the other. Pictures in the Mail today show serious activity on Kracatoa, and if that blows like last time, we won't need to worry about the carbon print. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
observer Posted July 31, 2009 Author Report Share Posted July 31, 2009 Hence natures way of demonstrating, despite our growing numbers, just how insignificant we are when it comes to climate change. The big one, of course, would be the Yellowstone National Park caldera! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Peter T Posted August 1, 2009 Report Share Posted August 1, 2009 Hence natures way of demonstrating, despite our growing numbers, just how insignificant we are when it comes to climate change. The big one, of course, would be the Yellowstone National Park caldera! Exactly! Man is just a small speck on the planet that he is abusing with his greed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.