UKH

The main two things that spring to mind for me are
Rising sea levels
Warmer climate with more unpredictable weather patterns

But are these things I should be bothered about and why?

In reply to ow arm:

Risng sea levels means less land. Less land means more competition for space to grow food, and more tensions between countries etc.

Unpredicable weather patterns mean food production will be variable, leading to gluts and famines. It will also bring more damage to arable land when rivers flood more often.

Ok, so these changes wont be big to start with, but in a hundred years when the global population has increased massively, it might have got to the point that the population is no longer sustainable?

In reply to ow arm:

Your house might end up under water

In reply to ow arm:

Funny how no one is really interested even after another eerily warm day. Last night they had Caroline Lucas pitted against Owen Paterson on question time. The only green question was asked in the last 4 minutes and that was only because DD hurried them all up so he could squeeze it in.

It will be interesting to see what does affect you first. I think it may be something somewhat unforeseen.

In reply to ow arm:

Who knows but with your head stuck in the sand you won't see it until it is too late.

In reply to ow arm:

why is my head stuck in the sand? the reason Im asking is because im interested and want to know!

In reply to ow arm:

You could buy the Independent or Guardian tomorrow and read about the latest IPCC report which was on the news tonight.

In reply to balmybaldwin:


I don't think we'll see tensions like that.. we'll lose a few islands, attols etc but doubt that will lead to war..



I think food supply will be the first but we don't know, look at US oil prices, we've been paying $2.70 a gallon here in NJ.. 3 years ago it was pushing $4 and unlikely to go down supposedly..

We'll lose areas of land and production, plus extreme events will affect production, but conversely we could actually gain land suitable for farming. It's just so chaotic its dangerous to make solid predictions because that's also food for the naysayers when those predictions are inevitably wrong at some point.

In reply to ow arm:

I've read that an increase of up to 2 degrees in av world temperatures will be relatively benign, with a net improvement in the World's ability to feed itself, greater than 2 degrees 'things' get worse quite quickly; the dilemma is how to limit the change.

All 'change' will have consequences, so perhaps we would be advised to avoid change in the first place.

In reply to IainRUK:


I think we're going to see massive tensions because of problems with agriculture. Increasing areas will become unable to support even the scantest of subsistence farming, so there will be significant movements of people into areas where margins are already thin. Displacement of people is going to be a central element of change.

In reply to IainRUK:



Most parts of Bangladesh are less than 12 m (39.4 ft) above sea level, and it is estimated that about 10% of the land would be flooded if the sea level were to rise by 1 m (3.28 ft).[37], this to a population of 180million.

In reply to Phil1919:


I don't think that is fair. However, which is most pressing? Stuff that is happening here and now, or something that will probably happen in a lifetime, but no one is quite sure how it will manifest itself or what we can realistically do about stopping it from happening?

In reply to ByEek:


I think most people do what they can but the reality is people are more concerned with the cost of getting to work and heating the house.

My wife works 5 miles away, driving takes 15mins and costs pennies. The bus or should I say busses from 2 different bus companies so you can't get a single day ticket takes over 1 hour and costs between 4 and 5 quid.
Yes she could cycle but let's be honest it's not nice in winter and it's only a small company without showers and changing rooms.

In reply to IainRUK:
I've heard some of the people whose job it is to think about things like this, predict that we could have climate change related terrorism, with the in/action of developed countries being used to feed resentment in countries which are suffering from things like drought and flooding, and rising sea levels.

In reply to ow arm:

Most obviously food, water and energy (supply and cost)

Less directly impactful (to us in the UK) are rising sea levels, migration, conflict and ecosystem degradation (reefs and mangroves for example which provide protection against natural disasters)

In reply to Dax H:


Agreed. But the problem is that the sort of changes we need to make in order have a positive impact go way beyond turning the heating down one notch or not driving 15 minutes down the road - or even having a bus that drives 15 minutes down the road.

I can't think of many people who want to go back to the sort of life lived in the late 40's.

In reply to Phil1919:


Or even better, just read the report. It's only 40 pages, and when you remove title pages and space for figures, its really not a lot of reading.

http://www.ipcc.ch/pdf/assessment-report/ar5/syr/SYR_AR5_SPM.pdf

Of course, if you want to read the entire thing (rather than just the summary) then you may need to put a lot more time aside.

In reply to ByEek:

The biggest thing we can do is work from home.. for many of us we don't actually have to be in an office.

But strangely I don't think that has taken off. We already have all the technology we need to this but it's just not being as popular as it once was.

In reply to Dax H:




Where does this myth come from ? motoring costs are generally around 40p / mile so its a couple of quid each way

In reply to GrahamD:

Short-termism - essentially, "I only put in a quids worth of fuel" followed a few months later by "I can't believe how much they charged me for a service" and "tyres are really expensive"



sadly, there's nothing much that we can all do towards the problem (at least certainly nothing very palatable) we either need to live like we did prior to the industrial revolution, or kill a large proportion of the human population (like 1/3 to 1/2).

In reply to GrahamD:

5 miles each way = 50 miles per week, car averages 50mpg so at today's price that is £1.10.
its in the free tax band.
Insurance works out at. 77p per day.
Annual service and mot. 46p per day.
Replacement tyres every 5 years. 15p per year.
Total cost not including capital cost of car £2.48 per day.
If you include the capital cost of the car that adds roughly £10 per day but taking in to account that she uses the car after work and on weekends all of the above figures are on the high side because I worked them out based on a 5 day working week.
So based on the fact we would have the car anyway the high end of the running costs to get to work and back is £2.48 and takes 30 mins to do the round trip opposed to paying the best part of £4 and using 4 different busses each day for 2 is hours.

In reply to IainRUK:


Radio 4's Costing the Earth looked into that one. It is not the answer. Heating lots of (often inefficient) houses in the day is not necessarily more efficient than centralising people in an office with the added commute.

Similarly, food packaging is a mixed blessing. Often seen as being wasteful, it actually prolongs the life of perishable goods that would otherwise have to be binned before being sold.

Trying to do anything about either is still tinkering around the edges of the issue. Are you prepared to do away with your washing machine because that is the kind of sacrifice I feel needs to be made.

In reply to ByEek:


For a start, it's a mistake to think there's one single answer. There are lots of different things which can be done, and which need to be done. Some are small things which cumulatively add up to something meaningful, but the big impacts will come from governmental decisions and international collaborations.


Not necessarily, but it might be, depending on circumstances. Don't rule something out because it doesn't work for you - it may well work for someone else. And frankly, anything that reduces the time wasted commuting is a good thing.


But it can also lead to over-purchasing. We waste stupid amounts of food.


Why do you need to get rid of your washing machine? Your current washing machine is already much more efficient than anything your parents had, and the CO2 emissions associated with the required electricity are already lower than they were 20 years ago. Of the real frustrations is the idea that we've progressed to this point and we have to keep going in the same direction with the dependency on fossil fuels. There are more ways than ever to produce lower carbon electricity, and there are more ways than ever to make better use of the energy we already have. There are massive economic opportunities to be gained from the pursuit of efficient energy use and the generation of low-carbon electricity.

In reply to tony:
A good response.


I have heard this, but am not convinced (yet). Wind power in this country is as unpopular as ever. Nuclear - similarly. The government have rolled out a number of initiatives to make people's homes more efficient (we have just had free loft insulation fitted!) but the word on the street is that the uptake on these initiatives is still low. It would seem that if you offer a free lunch, people don't want it.

In reply to ByEek:



Depends on who listen to, and regardless of its popularity, wind power is making a meaningful contribution, as will tidal and wave energy in coming years. Just because we haven't replaced all the old coal stations doesn't mean it won't happen at some stage (but see below)


Again, it depends on who you listen to, and there's a solid case to be made for nuclear. The problems of costs are as yet unresolved, but there's a strong will on the part of Government to press ahead with nuclear.

It's also the case that even coal and gas could have a future, with the successful implementation of carbon capture and storage (CCS). Sadly, we've been woefully poor at pushing ahead with this, but that doesn't mean it will remain undeveloped. This is also one of the cases where there are terrific economic opportunities - whoever comes up with good CCS solutions will have a massive worldwide market, and at the moment, it looks like the Chinese are some way ahead of us.


True, take-up is low, people are stupid. What would help is if planning laws had far higher energy efficiency requirements than they currently do. This is a real failure of Government leadership. Lack of Government leadership and a stupid belief that 'the market' will provide the solutions is a real blight on progress.

In reply to ByEek:

But I think that assumes non-renewables.. which we can get past..

The simple fact is a commute is wasted time.. plus the energy costs.

I don't think wind is that unpopular, for some reason it is in the UK but not in much of Europe.

I certainly think its part of the answer.

In reply to IainRUK:


Agreed. But working from home when you have a collaborative job just doesn't work. It does my nut in when someone I need to speak to is working from home. And of course everyone who is anyone knows that "working from home" has different meanings to different people - usually of the less productive type!

In reply to ByEek:

It can work. My partner and I work collaboratively with lots of people, many of whom we've never met, but speak to regularly via conference calls and communicate with every day via email. We share book manuscripts and proofs with authors, editors, designers, typesetters, indexers and publishers on a daily basis. If someone is working at home, they're working - they're in communication with their co-workers. If not, there's something wrong with the way things are being managed. All the people I know who work from home are very productive.

Having said all that, it's a pretty tiny part of the issue.

In reply to tony:

I am not saying it doesn't work for some. Just that I find it very difficult to deal with someone over the phone if it is about discussing a complex software design problem, especially if more than two people are involved. Conference calls are always slow and inefficient and the sound is always terrible. As soon as you start bringing screens of code and or whiteboards into the equation, the whole thing becomes over complicated.

And then of course, there is the quick question which involves trapsing to someone's desk only to find out they are at home. You then try to skype them and after a 15 minute typing marathon, the conversation moves to the phone and then you need to describe something using good old pen and paper and you are stuffed. It is a nightmare.

In reply to ByEek:

Solar power is beginning to make inroads. We have just had a 4kw system fitted. It included a device which puts all your surplus electricity which you generate but don't use into the hot water tank. The tank is well lagged and it makes a serious cut in the amount of gas needed to heat the water.

In reply to Dax H:


£1.10 a gallon??

In reply to Ridge:


£1.10 per daily commute in fuel alone. Probably about right, I get 40mpg on diesel(*) (admittedly much lower on my actual work run), 5.8 miles each way and worked it out as around £1.60 or so


* should be 50mpg but the thermostat is stuck open so it never gets up to proper temp and I have been too lazy/timid to see to it.