World Leaders on Climate change..

[DulwichFox]

Strange that The Worlds Leaders are discussing Climate Change to save the Planet whilst at the same time dropping thousand of tonnes of bombs destroying the Planet. Building nuclear weapons that if ever used would mean not much

would be left of the Planet to protect.

How dangerous a place it would be if any of them had brains..

DulwichFox

[Blah Blah]

We can add to that fracking, and even beefburgers! I was reading about the carbon footprint of beef production yesterday. It's something to behold.

Truth is that it will take a radical shake up of pretty much everything we consume, too much of a shake up for the corporate billionaires facilitating most of the damage, and governments are beholden to them. The only question is when will we reach the 2 degree tipping point, not if.

[????]

Oh is that right? The biggest reduction in emissions among the developed countries in recent years has been the US, the reason, Fracking. Fracking is far 'cleaner' than coal for eg

[miga]

If only it was politically palatable to go nuclear....

[BrandNewGuy]

???? Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Oh is that right? The biggest reduction in

> emissions among the developed countries in recent

> years has been the US, the reason, Fracking.

> Fracking is far 'cleaner' than coal for eg

Your evidence?

[Blah Blah]

How can fracking be cleaner than coal when the aim of it is to extract a fossil fuel? It's end game is still to add to greenhouse gas. There are also environmental concerns. The cocktail of hundreds of chemicals, and the pollution of ground water. We really should be moving away from all kinds of fossil fuels.

[????]

Because Coal is very, very dirty

[Loz]

Because you get more energy released from burning gas than you do burning coal. You also get an addition plus in that burning coal also releases quite a lot more mercury into the environment.

[BrandNewGuy]

The trouble with the clean gas / dirty coal argument is that much of the dirty energy has been offshored to China and is embedded in all the goods that are imported. China pretends to be green, but it's frightening looking at how dependent it is on coal.

[Otta]

It's always good to have the environment on the agenda, but when Obama says he doesn't want an agreement that is made law, because he's stand no chance of getting it through in the U.S. you do question the point.

[uncleglen]

All this fossil fuel stuff has been going on for decades- what is gob-smackingly amazing is that plastic bags are STILL being produced in alarming numbers. They all talk the talk....as for beef production, it was well known decades ago that McDonalds were clearing tracts of rain Forest to farm cows. And methane(from farts) is the most potent greenhouse gas. So it appears that even the easiest preventative measures are not being employed, and most individuals are doing whatever they want and sod the environment!

[Blah Blah]

Completely agree Uncle. We all have a part to play from the top down.

[numbers]

This sadly never ceases to amaze me - the staggering ignorance of those who bang on about fracking on social media and er, internet forums.

As Loz and Quids say, pound for pound you get more energy from burning gas than you do with coal. Coal has more impurities so it's less thermally efficient. Basic chemistry. Fracking has replaced coal in the US. Not going to happen in China, not when they want to keep the economy going and make (more)money!

[Blah Blah]

What does that matter? It's all fossil fuel and all adds to greenhouse emissions. There is growing evidence of the environmental damage of fracking in some areas. It is not ignorant to point those out, nor is it ignorant to challenge the authorities that allow fracking companies for example to keep secret the cocktail of chemicals they force into the shale to extract the oil and gas. It's all bad and requires a shift of thinking away from it.

[numbers]

Never thought I'd say this but I miss the Drawing Room.

*shoots self after banging head against wall*

[DulwichFox]

Back in the 20's 30's 40's 50's and indeed decades before we burnt coal in our homes...

Yes we had smog due to cold air and smoke (in the winter) but was there a real threat of global warning.

NO. I don't think there was..

Why. We had Vast forests in the Amazon and other regions.. which absorbed CO2 and produced Oxygen.

That's how it works. (worked)

Deforestation IMHO has had a much bigger negative effect on the environment and climate than all the emissions

from all the vehicles and factories across the planet.

We have destroyed and continue to destroy the mechanism that replaces the oxygen that balances the eco system.

DulwichFox.

[Blah Blah]

I think there's a lot of truth in that Fox. It's not just one thing or another, but the cumulative effect of a whole process.

And that's part of the problem with the debate, and why nothing seems to change very much. We tend to say well if we drive less cars (and let's remember electricity has to be made using fuel, so electric cars don't solve the problem) then we'll reduce carbon footprint, but then we ignore all the beef we consume (not me though being a vegetarian).

We waste so many resources, and energy in extracting them and we are all guilty of buying into the consumerist economies that drive it. It all has to change if anything is to change, but we know it won't.