And another reason why the UK is S**t

mho

mho

Messages
3,134
Name
Mark
Edit My Images
No
And another reason why the UK is s**t

THE Conservatives will propose banning plasma screens and other energy-guzzling electrical goods in a report to be unveiled next week.

The proposals target white goods like fridges and freezers, as well as TVs, personal computers and DVD players that use too much energy or operate on stand-by.

The ideas come from a Conservative group set up by David Cameron to develop policies to protect the environment and although the measures to make household electrical appliances more energy efficient are not binding on Mr Cameron, they are thought likely to be warmly received by the Tory leader.

The group will also suggest scrapping Gross Domestic Product (GDP) as a measure of the nation’s success in favour of a model that measures people’s happiness drawn up up by Friends of the Earth.

Under the proposals, a cap could be set on the energy use of each electrical appliance, and those exceeding limits could be banned from sale in the UK.

A new labelling requirement could be introduced to inform consumers of products’ annual energy consumption compared with other similar appliances.

And there could be a ban on electrical goods with stand-by lights which can stay on indefinitely. Some 2 per cent of Britain’s total electricity use is currently taken up by appliances left on stand-by rather than being switched off.

The proposals are set to be unveiled on Thursday in the final report of the Tories’ Quality of Life Policy Group, chaired by former Environment Secretary John Gummer and green activist Zac Goldsmith, a Conservative spokesman confirmed.

Prime Minister Gordon Brown has already announced his ambition to “eliminate” the stand-by function on appliances, which was blasted by the Government’s energy review last year as a waste of electricity.

The report is expected to focus on plasma-screen TVs as particularly wasteful of electricity, and it is thought that many models would fall foul of proposed energy cap unless dramatically more efficient technology is developed.

Householders are also expected to be offered tax cuts potentially worth thousands of pounds to make their homes more energy-efficient.

Mr Gummer warned: “We live in a joined-up world and yet we organise our lives in silos. The imperative of global warming demands that we change that approach utterly - not just governments, but businesses, groups and individuals.”
Click to expand...
 
Hmmm. I think we all accept that we can't go on ignoring global warming, but why do we on this tiny island have to bear the brunt of these sort of measures when the biggest part of the worlds population don't give a **** anyway? :shrug:
 
Global Warming....caused by using too much energy or a natural cycle of the earth? Did the last ice age end because too many cavemen left their tellies on standby?
 
It's all smoke and mirrors, politicians will say anything to look good for the press, the tories especially would never implement a policy that hurt big business.
 
LOL I can see that being a vote puller :LOL:

Like CT says, on the grand scale of things, we're a teeny tiny island.

Look at where all our goods come from, China for example. Look at the pollution and the contribution to global warming there.....
 
Marcel said:
LOL I can see that being a vote puller :LOL:

Like CT says, on the grand scale of things, we're a teeny tiny island.

Look at where all our goods come from, China for example. Look at the pollution and the contribution to global warming there.....
Click to expand...

"We" in the west decide to close all our factories here, and move all the production to China because it will cost less in monetary terms. All the raw materials are shipped to China, manufacturing is done in older technology factories, by less efficient methods, by Chinese people working hugely long hours, and the resulting goods are then shipped all the way back here.

Exactly how is this the fault of the Chinese? We closed our factories, we pressed them to join the WTO, we invested in the factories (knowing where the power would come from (coal) and the state of their technology), and WE buy the goods.

How is it now "their fault"?
 
I'm one of the people who doesnt really a rats to things like this, we cant stop it and reverse it, its the future and then the history of the earth, it will give time team 5045 AWE (after worlds end) something to do trying to find out what happened and how we lived.
 
And what New Labour paper did you read that in.

Global Warming....caused by using too much energy or a natural cycle of the earth? Did the last ice age end because too many cavemen left their tellies on standby?
Click to expand...

From 1940 to late 1970s the earth got cooler and with the consent of leading scientists the BBC had a program saying we were heading for the next ice age.

So over the last 30 years the earth has got warmer and the same scientists are saying we are heading for global over heating.

It's all total crap to give scientists a reason for goverment funding. We need to look over tens of thousand of years not just a decade or two.
 
Moadib said:
"We" in the west decide to close all our factories here, and move all the production to China because it will cost less in monetary terms. All the raw materials are shipped to China, manufacturing is done in older technology factories, by less efficient methods, by Chinese people working hugely long hours, and the resulting goods are then shipped all the way back here.

Exactly how is this the fault of the Chinese? We closed our factories, we pressed them to join the WTO, we invested in the factories (knowing where the power would come from (coal) and the state of their technology), and WE buy the goods.

How is it now "their fault"?
Click to expand...

Not necessarily saying it's their fault. I'm merely stating that what's the point in the measures we take as a small country, when on the grand scale of things, compared to, for example, China....it's merely a drop in the ocean. (No pun intended).
 
The temperature of the earth fluctuates (above AND below average) over thousands of years. whether we like it or not. those that think we are the sole cause are wrong. simple as that. one volcano gives off more Co2 than we can give off as a whole race in one year (as in, of the order 10^9 tons EACH erruption(sp?)), and that is but one of many of the natural processes of the planet that give off Co2.

HOWEVER, before you all jump on me, i do agree, we do accelerate the process to the point where we need to do something about it. Standby lights? oh ffs, come on! get real. we need to focus on the real causes of Co2 production, and lower them.

Funding for scientists from the government is utter crap. they are given money to come to a predefined solution/verdict. Besides, anyone that forms an opinion on what politicians say (Only) need their head checking.

it will give time team 5045 AWE (after worlds end) something to do trying to find out what happened and how we lived.
Click to expand...

What a wonderfull outlook :/ :p

Global Warming....caused by using too much energy or a natural cycle of the earth? Did the last ice age end because too many cavemen left their tellies on standby?
Click to expand...

Exactly
 
So what uses the other 98%?
 
Woodsy2k said:
<snip> one volcano gives off more Co2 than we can give off as a whole race in one year (as in, of the order 10^9 tons EACH erruption(sp?))<snip>
Click to expand...

I afraid that you've been misled, perhaps by the recent Channel 4 documentary 'The Great Global Warming Swindle" which made a similar claim, or perhaps by some other source.

Scientists have calculated that volcanoes emit between about 130-230 million tonnes (145-255 million tons) of CO2 into the atmosphere every year (Gerlach, 1999, 1991). This estimate includes both subaerial and submarine volcanoes, about in equal amounts. Emissions of CO2 by human activities, including fossil fuel burning, cement production, and gas flaring, amount to about 27 billion tonnes per year (30 billion tons) [ ( Marland, et al., 2006) - The reference gives the amount of released carbon (C), rather than CO2, through 2003.]. Human activities release more than 130 times the amount of CO2 emitted by volcanoes--the equivalent of more than 8,000 additional volcanoes like Kilauea (Kilauea emits about 3.3 million tonnes/year)! (Gerlach et. al., 2002)
Click to expand...
source

Here's a useful article from Medialens about the C4 programme I mentioned, which seems to have convinced a remarkable number of people to believe things that are at best misleading and in many cases flatly untrue.

Most of the participants were from the same small group of 'experts' who always show up in this context, some of whom got their start using similar PR techniques to deny that smoking caused cancer on behalf of tobacco companies, and who now benefit from funding by Exxon as documented in this report from the Union of Concerned Scientists.

The one participant whose appearance was a surprise, Prof Carl Wunsch of MIT proved to have been deliberately misled by the programme makers and was edited to appear to support their claims, which he in fact does not. He's really angry about this for obvious reasons.

With this sort of stuff going on, it's advisable to check your sources carefully before accepting claims that global warming isn't happening.

PS I won't be around now until the weekend, but will respond to any replies when I return.
 
China and USA are the 2 biggest culprits of excessive co2 emissions, yet neither of them are willing to accept and change.
American's all drive round in big trucks with 3 litre engines that just about manage 4 m/pg.

I know we emit a fair bit of co2, but if we're the only people changing, it isn't going to help that much, and I'm sure someone will fill the spot of no co2 emissions.
If they want to help the environment, solar panels and cells on every roof of every house, windfarms as far as the eye can see, and the forced use of electric cars.
That probably won't help.
So maybe a few fossil fuel factories just for good measures ;)
 
Well, it does seem quite obserd that conservative should consider this move. It does have a bonus. If these manuafactures wish to continue selling to these tiny shores, then they will develope the energy saving technology in the products under attack. Not only could this help global warming (should our energy consumption be the cause) but it would save on our fuel bills. This would leave us with more spare money to spend on camera gear. Everyones a winner.
 
foodpoison said:
China and USA are the 2 biggest culprits of excessive co2 emissions, yet neither of them are willing to accept and change.
American's all drive round in big trucks with 3 litre engines that just about manage 4 m/pg.

I know we emit a fair bit of co2, but if we're the only people changing, it isn't going to help that much, and I'm sure someone will fill the spot of no co2 emissions.
If they want to help the environment, solar panels and cells on every roof of every house, windfarms as far as the eye can see, and the forced use of electric cars.
That probably won't help.
So maybe a few fossil fuel factories just for good measures ;)
Click to expand...

Some good comments there mate. For the same size of car that uses a 1.6 in the UK, the Yanks will have a 4.0 saloon. Most of our pickups are 2/2.5l diesels, the yanks have 5 litre engines and don't give a flying thingy.

I know most people don't want a windfarm in their back gardens but the cost of solar panels seems to be a bit expensive. If the government gave a tax benefit, people would probably go for it.
 
I have no problem with these proposals at all to be honest. Yes we might be a small island, but is that a reason not to take an active role in trying to reduce pollution, carbon dioxide emissions and power consumption? I certainly agree that we need to get Cina, USA, India etc onboard to have any sort impact, and hopefully one day we will. but we can't expect developing nations to take action if we can't be bothered either.

A more important factor for me is also to reduce Britains energy use. We currently rely on a huge amount of imported energy (Gas from Russia and Electricity from France) This reliance on foreign energy is potentially risky from an economic point of view. For example, what happens if Russia gets even more cocky and cuts off out Gas supply? We therefore need to make outselves much more self sufficient. This will have to come in two forms; Increased energy production (New Nuclear plants + renewable sources) and reduced use (More efficient appliances etc). So I give a thumbs up to this proposal. Scrapping the GDP seems a bit silly though.

Edit; And Global warming might be natural or it might not be. But is it really worth the risk to find out? Surely its better to make sure we have a little an effect on the environment as possible.
 
antihero said:
Global Warming....caused by using too much energy or a natural cycle of the earth? Did the last ice age end because too many cavemen left their tellies on standby?
Click to expand...

:agree: They are my thoughts too. It's just crazy.
 
Global warming is a major problem and you should all sit up and take notice !

The sooner we act the better off we'll all be.




so I suggest we start voting out all the politicians who use it to further their careers and stop paying attention to 'scientists' who use it to get govt funding for their 'playtime'.
 
Messiah Khan said:
I have no problem with these proposals at all to be honest. Yes we might be a small island, but is that a reason not to take an active role in trying to reduce pollution, carbon dioxide emissions and power consumption?
Click to expand...

Exactly. Couldn't agree more. It doesn't have to have anything to do with global warming (tm), it's about being responsible for the planet we live on and keeping it as nice as poss for as long as poss.

PS: I think Marcel is right. There is no way that the conservatives, or labour for that matter, would create legislation this strict. It'll be watered down until it's almost meaningless. My hope would be that it gets companies thinking more about energy effeciency.
 
Messiah Khan said:
I have no problem with these proposals at all to be honest. Yes we might be a small island, but is that a reason not to take an active role in trying to reduce pollution, carbon dioxide emissions and power consumption? I certainly agree that we need to get Cina, USA, India etc onboard to have any sort impact, and hopefully one day we will. but we can't expect developing nations to take action if we can't be bothered either.

A more important factor for me is also to reduce Britains energy use. We currently rely on a huge amount of imported energy (Gas from Russia and Electricity from France) This reliance on foreign energy is potentially risky from an economic point of view. For example, what happens if Russia gets even more cocky and cuts off out Gas supply? We therefore need to make outselves much more self sufficient. This will have to come in two forms; Increased energy production (New Nuclear plants + renewable sources) and reduced use (More efficient appliances etc). So I give a thumbs up to this proposal. Scrapping the GDP seems a bit silly though.

Edit; And Global warming might be natural or it might not be. But is it really worth the risk to find out? Surely its better to make sure we have a little an effect on the environment as possible.
Click to expand...

:agree:
 
well ive got less than forty years left on planet earth ( almost certainly ) although i havnt actually booked my deathday yet ,so i dont give a toss ( sorry does that sound selfish ? ) ,but seriously ,i really dont think we are going to be able to do enough to make any difference ,maybe if the whole world stopped manufacturing ( it aint gonna happen )
we may add a few more decades , but in the great scheme of things its nothing . we grew some nice peaches this year so oranges and lemons next !
 
inophoto said:
PS: I think Marcel is right. There is no way that the conservatives, or labour for that matter, would create legislation this strict. It'll be watered down until it's almost meaningless. My hope would be that it gets companies thinking more about energy effeciency.
Click to expand...

I suspect this might be the case. I think the future lies not so much in discouraging people to stop doing the 'bad' things, but instead to encourage them to doing the 'better' alternatives. Ie, increased funding and grants for renewable energy, recycling etc shemes. Introducing legislation for including better insulations/solar panels etc on all new houses.

Theres no point increasing taxes in the hope that it will discourage people if there is no realistic alternatives. Look at increased road/fuel taxes. Thats not going to stop people driving, as they have to get from A to B no matter how much it costs. Instead money needs to be spend on much better public transport, and encouraging more local trade (Rather than getting your potatoes from outer Siberia)
 
I want to see David whatshisname knock on my door and ask for my plasma to be turned off.

He wouldn't know whats hit him....... :bat:

nothing comes between swmbo and uktv food :eek:
 
Perhaps we could cut our "Carbon Footprint" (another Nu-Layba catchphrase I can't stand) by closing the shutters on TPF and turning our computers off instead. ;)
 
foodpoison said:
American's all drive round in big trucks with 3 litre engines that just about manage 4 m/pg.
Click to expand...

What utter drivel, most modern car/trucks in the USA do over 20 mpg (that's using smaller US gallons remember) even the 2007 corvette does 24mpg. The best-selling passenger car in America in 2006 was the Toyota Camry and next was the Honda Accord not really gas guzzling giants.
 
what really pi***s me off is that reducing our personal emmisions and carbon footprint in our homes is like spitting in the ocean compared with industry and commerce. I don't see the Government legislating against the main culprets
Look at all the city office blocks and churches etc that are lit up like Christmas trees all night and they have the damn cheek to pressurize district Councils into reducing street and footpath lighting grrrrrrrrrr don't get me started grrrrrrrr mr angry
 
... and I bet Mr Cameron has a 12" b&w portable sitting embedded in the wall of his country residence eh!
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top