A few years ago there was a clamour from scientists and they were poo poo'd by other scientists (probably in the train of some huge conglomerate).
A few years ago Tony Blair did react to some of the alarms but subsequently went to america to see George Bush and announced before he left america to return home that he had changed his mind on the climate issue and would re-evaluate his approach to global warming.
About this time it was said by scientists that it would become dangerous in about 100 to 200 years.
Then it dropped by stages untill now it will be 2040 ie 34 years away.
This reapraisal has taken place over the last couple of years, so what will they be saying in another couple of years?
Saw on the news that this is going to be a 'El Nino'year .Already they are predicting higher temperatures and weather extremes for this year.
I have seen so many people out with no coats .....In January !!.I have noticed that we don't get the cold weather of a few decades ago.Also picked roses in my garden today .Trees still have leaves .What have we done........
My daughters tomato plants - out in the back garden still were producing toms just before christmas. Not sure if thats due to it being warmer and a sheltered-ish garden or them just being super tom plants
' ' ' ' love your 'ears ' on the smilies.
Just pulled up my marigolds ...in January ,Seeds are beginning to sprout that should'nt come up until April.
Whilst out walking my dog the other day ,I got chatting to a retired chap and we spoke about how unseasonal the weather is.His comment was good for global warming ,I asked him how he felt about future generations and the legacy we will have left them .His response was "Well,I won't be here so I don't care"........the same can be said for our Leaders ,they won't be in power so they don't care either.
I see the chap who applied for a wind turbine in his garden at Kirby has had it refused.
About time someone came up with a smaller one that won't have such an impact (and would be cheaper) ,it may encourage us to be a bit greener.
Oh and BAN COWS !!!!!!!!!! methane making munchers
Oh Amenity.....the mind boggles
Sorry ,but I had a mental image of a cow walking round attatched by it's bum to a hoover tube
Seriously though ,my husband likes cows as he used to work with them ,many moons ago.I dislike them as they are runny at both ends .Mind ,I do like one with Roast potatoes ect
Thinking about it......I would expect that a 'average ' 18 st McDonalds munching chav would let loose the equivalent of a cows output.
AND ,what about filtering all that 'hot air' coming out of Westminster Reckon you could fly halfway round the world on that alone....
I'm rather inclined to set a tax on the hot air from Westminster. And while were at it store it as before into a massive ballon, put the polly's into the basket and let them go.
Nah.....just anchor them up there and let them beg....heh ,heh ,heh
Or ,.....I suppose we could always send em on a looooong break in the Big Brother house and just happen to forget to turn the camers on ....and just happen to lose the keys
Nah if your gonna put them in the BB house you have gotta have the cameras on - look what it did for George Galloway - the cat incident still makes me shudder.
Imagine the fun tasks they could be made to do. Like surviving on the basic pension etc.
Classic case of 'Do as I say -Not as I do'
Heard recently that a MP had suggested everyone have an allotted number of Air Miles.If you use yours up then it's either Tough Luck or buy from someone who is sensible enough to have saved theirs.
Why is it ,if you have the money/power you can get away with polluting ,ie if you have money ,you have a couple or three Gas guzzling 4x4's several long haul holidays a year ,burn more energy by having huge houses all fully heated and Jacuzzis ect.
I'd love to see what Bliars carbon footprint is.
I'd love to see the Blairs living in the real world for once. I'm sure that man is really in some weird fairy tale, tonys world place most of the time. It might explain that rather scary grin.
Still global warming but more international, from todays Lloyds List.
Andy Xie, formerly chief economist at Morgan Stanley in Hong Kong, has been strident on this point. “China has kept the global cost of production artificially low by not paying for pollution and labour benefits. The political pressure within China is as such that the government is normalising production costs, which could boost global inflation.”
Mr Xie has argued that lax environmental controls were more important than labour costs in attracting production relocation to China.
He pointed out that China’s pollution is 12 times the world average per unit of GDP. Two-fifths of China’s seven major river basins are badly polluted, as are 90% of the rivers running through cities. Roughly 300m rural Chinese do not have access to purified water. In Beijing, the Communist Party has finally prioritised the environment, recognising that pollution is a growing risk to its credibility.
Well it's mid-January ,the suns out and we were out taking the dog for a walk on the beach at 7.30am.I had to take my winter coat off as it's hardly mid-winter weather.
There is definately something strange going on and STILL some of the world leaders refuse to accept that climate change has happened.
We had to cut the grass yesterday as it's still growing ,something we have never had to do before.
I'm by no reach of the imagination an expert on the weather ,but if the ordinary man can see what's going on ,why won't those who can do something about it ...do something.......
Saw this in Lloyds List today, it's about an oil spill but as a sideline global warming.
The Coastal Administration estimated that 290 tonnes of bunker fuel spilt into the water, Eide Kjaeraas said.
"It is a serious accident -- absolutely," she said.
The 19,864gt Server, which was carrying no cargo en route to Murmansk in northwestern Russia, had 585 tonnes of bunker fuel oil and 72 tonnes of marine diesel aboard when it ran aground, the Coastal Administration said in a statement.
Four tug boats and four Coast Guard vessels took part in the clean-up and effort to control the spill on Saturday, it said.
"We have high seas, quite intense wind in the area so it is hard to estimate visually how much oil is out there," Eide Kjaeraas said.
A tank that had been situated where the ship broke in two held 290 tonnes of bunkers. Another tank with capacity of 300 tonnes is in the bow section that has been secured, she said.
Environmental groups feared the fuel could drift to a nearby bird sanctuary where a large number of birds have wintered due to unseasonally mild weather this year. But Eide Kjaeraas said no oil had been observed in the area.
It was unclear what caused the ship to run aground. Conditions were rough with seven-metre seas, but not unusually harsh for the time of year along Norway's coast, officials said.
"Some of the cane plantations are the size of European states, these vast monocultures have replaced important eco-systems," he said. "If you see the size of the plantations in the state of Sao Paolo they are oceans of sugar cane. In order to harvest you must burn the plantations which creates a serious air pollution problem in the city."
And so it has come to pass that US President George Bush has decreed that America must wean itself off oil with the help of biofuels made from corn, sugar cane and other suitable crops.
At its simplest, the argument for biofuels is this: By growing crops to produce organic compounds that can be burnt in an engine, you are not adding to the overall levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere.
The amount of CO2 that the fuel produces when burnt should balance the amount absorbed during the growth of the plants.
However, many biofuel crops, such as corn, are grown with the help of fossil fuels in the form of fertilisers, pesticides and the petrol for farm equipment.
One estimate is that corn needs 30 per cent more energy than the finished fuel it produces.
Another problem is the land required to produce it. One estimate is that the grain needed to fill the petrol tank of a 4X4 with ethanol is sufficient to feed a person for a year.
From the Indy today. extract
One estimate is that the grain needed to fill the petrol tank of a 4X4 with ethanol is sufficient to feed a person for a year.
....The petrol head side of me says--so what----but the sound economic side of me asks why we dont all have a 'family' scooter to nip into town on, or to pop into the Bakers for a baguette or two... You can get 3 or 4 scoots in one car park space, you can run 4 scoots for one car, and---- dont go their for how many scoots for 4x4 consumption... The only down side to this argument is-- Mr Brown will lose out on tax revenue.........
Did anyone watch Global Warming the Swindle on the tv last night? It had some very interesting points to think about .
Now I am not sure who I believe............
I have just promised my youngest son a bumper birthday present in the year 2050, of course I will have died at least thirty years before that date even if I live to a very ripe old age.
So much for TB's revolutionary reform on Global Warming.
You cannot post new topics in this forum You cannot reply to topics in this forum You cannot edit your posts in this forum You cannot delete your posts in this forum You cannot vote in polls in this forum
')
')
.Mind ,I do like one with Roast potatoes ect
