we all know the governments green tax issue is a complete lie and just a reason to get us to pay more tax .it is a fact that we are a very small country and it is also a fact that china that is building 2 coal fired power stations a week polute the planet more in a single week than we do in a year but i dont see china setting out any green issues or the usa for that the ppl of this country realy believe a country of our size can change the myth of global warming becauce that is all it is a and u will never get ppl to stop driving there cars and get them on public transport facts being as petrol prices rise so does the cost of public transport which is allready far too dear to tempt ppl on it along with being unreliable
Join the most popular community of UK swingers now
Login
Carbon Offsetting
I drive a 4x4 which is run on biodiesel, so less emissions than your average farting sheep. I don't use that fuel for it's low emissions, I use it because it's cheaper. I don't make any particular efforts to recycle or be "green", only if it's more convenient for me. Basically, I don't give a flying f*ck about future generations - this is my generation and I'll enjoy it as I see fit! Another war will soon come along and ruin any efforts made anyway.
Well our car is a reasonably sized car and our road tax is... wait for it... £35 a year... yes you heard right. When we got the reminder through the post we genuinely thought it was a mistake, but nope it’s correct a big £35 for a years road tax. Christmas has come early.
As for all these so called carbon initiatives, well it depends how much you want to help the environment.
If people think that it’s not worth doing because extra taxes are added to make up the cost difference then to me that’s selfish.
The country costs money to run and needs a certain amount to run effectively, so for example if everyone the UK stopped smoking they would have to gain that revenue from somewhere else to keep the country running.
It's just basic maths, like if your mortgage goes up £100 a month you have to find ways of making the extra money to cover it. Yes you might not save money but you could be helping the environment for generations to come.
As for all these so called carbon initiatives, well it depends how much you want to help the environment.
If people think that it’s not worth doing because extra taxes are added to make up the cost difference then to me that’s selfish.
The country costs money to run and needs a certain amount to run effectively, so for example if everyone the UK stopped smoking they would have to gain that revenue from somewhere else to keep the country running.
It's just basic maths, like if your mortgage goes up £100 a month you have to find ways of making the extra money to cover it. Yes you might not save money but you could be helping the environment for generations to come.
Sex God
Quote by SlurpySarah
I drive a 4x4 which is run on biodiesel, so less emissions than your average farting sheep. I don't use that fuel for it's low emissions, I use it because it's cheaper. I don't make any particular efforts to recycle or be "green", only if it's more convenient for me. Basically, I don't give a flying f*ck about future generations - this is my generation and I'll enjoy it as I see fit! Another war will soon come along and ruin any efforts made anyway.
:laughabove: Oh i did giggle
Another thing that sort of occured to me whilst reading this through......I wonder if there is a difference between how men and women perceive this. It seems to me that women seem to go with the whole 'Eco' thing far more easily than men. of course that excludes the marvellous slurpy above
men seem to want to question and doubt more. I may be wrong 
. 
Sex God
Well I have been doing my bit now almost all of this year as I have a friend who is absolutely pathological about it so I now feel guilty if I don't. She even recycles other people's rubbishh ffs!!!
However after reading some of the posts in this thread from people who are more knowledgeable than me on the subject it makes me wonder why the hell I've bothered
Yes lets get some of the bigger countries doing stuff to help and definitely lets get the companies who are seriously polluting to stop or reduce drastically and then we'll have more of an idea of what else is needed to be done by us ordinary folk!!!
However after reading some of the posts in this thread from people who are more knowledgeable than me on the subject it makes me wonder why the hell I've bothered
Yes lets get some of the bigger countries doing stuff to help and definitely lets get the companies who are seriously polluting to stop or reduce drastically and then we'll have more of an idea of what else is needed to be done by us ordinary folk!!!
Being green through reducing carbon emissions is basically, in the larger scheme of things, a load of old tosh!
C02 emissions make up a very, very small percentage of 'greenhouse' gasses doing damage to our atmosphere.... and of that percentage human endeavours form only a part... and of all the C02 produced by human endeavour, that produced by the UK is a miniscule amount as part of global production.
As for recycling - this has become a political mantra, defeated by it's own insane logic. Wiltshire, where I live, has no facilities to recycle or incinerate most of it's own waste - we export it to Gloucestershire by the truckload producing lots of emissions as we do so! the same applies to many communities in Europe and in the rest of the industrialised world - on a 'total cost' basis recycling can be less cost efficient than landfill and produce more gaseous waste in it's transportation and in the process of recycling itself.
Far more pertinent is the amount of methane and other hydrocarbons released into the atmosphere - and the actions of man again form a minor contribution. Cattle and livestock are wrongly attributed as being a major contributor here as well (and for the record, cows belch gasses rather than fart them, as the gas is produced in the upper of their two stomachs). The major contributor, from the animal world, in producing such gas emissions is the world's termite population.
Perhaps we should napalm the rain forests of the world's and the African plains to get rid of them all!
(after all, it isn't the rain forests which are the 'lungs of the earth' the forests of the northern taiga produce far more oxygen).
There is still no proof to the theory of 'greenhouse effect', nor to the assertion that the actions of mankind outweigh or contribute more to it than the natural processes associated with the geology of the planet. Gasses with contribute to the degradation of the ozone layer are reduced in vast quantities by volcanic and seismic activity - over which we can have no control whatsoever.
Studies of historical data have shown that global cold and warm spells on the scale of 'ice ages' have occurred throughout the earth's history and can be correlated with seismic activity and changes in ocean currents. The last great Northern European ice sheet ended on the northern edge of the Thames flood plain, but since then there have been periods where it has been warm enough to grow grapes in Northumberland and support a 'grain culture' in the Shetlands.
Being 'green' and reducing our dependence on petrochemicals makes sense for a whole load of reasons other than not contributing to climate change. but these are mostly political reasons, aiming to at least keep the status quo in terms of the world's industrialised order. While both India and China have populations and governments with the willpower to join the industrial elite (which we are begrudgingly accepting) we are able to keep the rest of the world's emerging nations in check by controlling (through world treaties on emissions etc.) how they may generate power supplies (e.g. by buying in western expertise and construction contracts for hydro-electric processes and effectively banning home grown and built coal fired generation capacity).
As for 4x4 vehicles and other large SUVs, if you don't go off road why do you need a vehicle with a bash plate under it's front end? other than to be able to navigate road humps and sleeping policemen at greater than the speed limits associated with them.
C02 emissions make up a very, very small percentage of 'greenhouse' gasses doing damage to our atmosphere.... and of that percentage human endeavours form only a part... and of all the C02 produced by human endeavour, that produced by the UK is a miniscule amount as part of global production.
As for recycling - this has become a political mantra, defeated by it's own insane logic. Wiltshire, where I live, has no facilities to recycle or incinerate most of it's own waste - we export it to Gloucestershire by the truckload producing lots of emissions as we do so! the same applies to many communities in Europe and in the rest of the industrialised world - on a 'total cost' basis recycling can be less cost efficient than landfill and produce more gaseous waste in it's transportation and in the process of recycling itself.
Far more pertinent is the amount of methane and other hydrocarbons released into the atmosphere - and the actions of man again form a minor contribution. Cattle and livestock are wrongly attributed as being a major contributor here as well (and for the record, cows belch gasses rather than fart them, as the gas is produced in the upper of their two stomachs). The major contributor, from the animal world, in producing such gas emissions is the world's termite population.
Perhaps we should napalm the rain forests of the world's and the African plains to get rid of them all!
(after all, it isn't the rain forests which are the 'lungs of the earth' the forests of the northern taiga produce far more oxygen).
There is still no proof to the theory of 'greenhouse effect', nor to the assertion that the actions of mankind outweigh or contribute more to it than the natural processes associated with the geology of the planet. Gasses with contribute to the degradation of the ozone layer are reduced in vast quantities by volcanic and seismic activity - over which we can have no control whatsoever.
Studies of historical data have shown that global cold and warm spells on the scale of 'ice ages' have occurred throughout the earth's history and can be correlated with seismic activity and changes in ocean currents. The last great Northern European ice sheet ended on the northern edge of the Thames flood plain, but since then there have been periods where it has been warm enough to grow grapes in Northumberland and support a 'grain culture' in the Shetlands.
Being 'green' and reducing our dependence on petrochemicals makes sense for a whole load of reasons other than not contributing to climate change. but these are mostly political reasons, aiming to at least keep the status quo in terms of the world's industrialised order. While both India and China have populations and governments with the willpower to join the industrial elite (which we are begrudgingly accepting) we are able to keep the rest of the world's emerging nations in check by controlling (through world treaties on emissions etc.) how they may generate power supplies (e.g. by buying in western expertise and construction contracts for hydro-electric processes and effectively banning home grown and built coal fired generation capacity).
As for 4x4 vehicles and other large SUVs, if you don't go off road why do you need a vehicle with a bash plate under it's front end? other than to be able to navigate road humps and sleeping policemen at greater than the speed limits associated with them.
As for 4x4 vehicles and other large SUVs, if you don't go off road why do you need a vehicle with a bash plate under it's front end? other than to be able to navigate road humps and sleeping policemen at greater than the speed limits associated with them.
I need it because the roads are crap...and they go over potholes without leaving half the exhaust system behind.
I also note that "it" emits less unburnt hydos' than a diesel bus or truck (by several hundred miles)
Bus CO2= 1677 g/km 4X4= 231 g/km
Bus NO = 10.7 g/km 4X4= g/km
Bus HC = 10.7 g/km 4X4= g/km
All-in-all, it seems that cars are not that bad when seen alongside the commercial traffic. You'll note that in towns that have controlled vehicles there is no great reduction in pollution, I understand that in Oxoford it went UP after private vehicles were banned from town centres. The London con charge has resulted in less vehicles in London (but not a large reduction) and the pollution remains essentially unchanged (even though vehicle technology should have resulted in a drop of at least 11%.....if TfLs' figures can be believed)
You'll note that levels of exhaust pollutants from large commercial engines have not seen the reductions that private vehicles have.
I can also drive whatever vehicle I want, until national and local gov decide it is illegal it will remain legal.
I will also continue to drive what I want until national and local gov decide to stop lying through their teeth to me about everything under the sun, just to control me, without any factual state to their continued rantings on climate (not-my-fault)change.
Sex God
Quote by JTS
I will also continue to drive what I want until national and local gov decide to stop lying through their teeth to me about everything under the sun, just to control me, without any factual state to their continued rantings on climate (not-my-fault)change.
I'll buy that :thumbup:
Saying that its all getting a bit techie for me now
I maybe a little on the simple side when it comes to flouride in the atmoshere and hydroelectric powerstaions in me fuel tank but the landfill stuff is basic is'nt it? More waste - less space - where does it go?The matter of politician conservative gases in the atmosphere is a little more complicated (bow out lost this is where your boll*xed and are just winging it!). Well I did hear that that little old eruption that had Monserrat in a little trouble. Caused more politicians and deoxskins in the air than the rest of the worlds human acivity than in the previous 3 years.
Sex God
An after thought why not, in the case of waste from things such as packaging from supermarkets make the said supermarkets responsible for the packaging by having them have returnable packaging.
Not complicated but hard to explain....Like the old returnable bottle on pop, you remember Corona bottles could be taken back to pubs or shops etc for a 10p 'thankyou' why not make the supermarkets responsible for collecting back from the customer the packaging and then claiming off the Govt for the percentage returned and disposed of. I bet the amount of packaging would get reduced then!.
This could be extended to other businesses - make them accountable for the disposal and costs for the waste they create.
Not complicated but hard to explain....Like the old returnable bottle on pop, you remember Corona bottles could be taken back to pubs or shops etc for a 10p 'thankyou' why not make the supermarkets responsible for collecting back from the customer the packaging and then claiming off the Govt for the percentage returned and disposed of. I bet the amount of packaging would get reduced then!.
This could be extended to other businesses - make them accountable for the disposal and costs for the waste they create.
Sex God
Quote by ukbeannie
As for 4x4 vehicles and other large SUVs, if you don't go off road why do you need a vehicle with a bash plate under it's front end? other than to be able to navigate road humps and sleeping policemen at greater than the speed limits associated with them.
I use it for towing....
And it doesnt have a bashplate
Sex God
definately a bad one this. I apologise far to contentious a subject.
