Slower world economy mean less pollution?

311

Is there anyway that a slower world economy would be benefitial to the envoirnment ,given that people have less money to squander on excess ?

Karoma

...no.
Companies will just cut corners more. Companies will lobby more to avoid laws that would force them to spend time and money on environmental protection. Companies will have much more widespread support and seen as victims just tryin' to survive. A serious/complete collapse of economies could provoke wars = total corner cutting and increased production... eh, no... Unless you count a complete collapse, ensuing Armageddon, and we're all completely wiped out (There's always hope. Cling to it. CLING.)

jhegarty

Karoma wrote: »

...no.
Companies will just cut corners more. Companies will lobby more to avoid laws that would force them to spend time and money on environmental protection. Companies will have much more widespread support and seen as victims just tryin' to survive. A serious/complete collapse of economies could provoke wars = total corner cutting and increased production... eh, no.

but world wide oil usage way down (50% drop in crude prices)

Karoma

jhegarty wrote: »

but world wide oil usage way down (50% drop in crude prices)

Temporarily.
It also means that oil is cheap and, thus, super-sexy-fuel for companies = "Why invest in sustainable power solutions now?!"

311

Karoma wrote: »

...no.
Companies will just cut corners more. Companies will lobby more to avoid laws that would force them to spend time and money on environmental protection. Companies will have much more widespread support and seen as victims just tryin' to survive. A serious/complete collapse of economies could provoke wars = total corner cutting and increased production... eh, no... Unless you count a complete collapse, ensuing Armageddon, and we're all completely wiped out (There's always hope. Cling to it. CLING.)

I Know the likes of china are getting heavier into pollution and probably will for the next decade at least.
But I thought in general the world over ,people might slow down on fuel consumption and power usage. I didn't realise the industrial side of things was at such a higher percentage of developed countries.

brianthebard

Production will be encouraged in order to stave off a slowdown, which feeds into what Karoma said but also means that if anything there could be more pollution.

311

Cheers ,thought maybe we might have snow for christmas because of the slowdown .
Not to worry.

Oldtree

The only benifit I can see to a downturn with oil consumption, and general industrial slowdown, (notwithstanding a supposed economic recovery 5-10 years from now), is that the amount of pollution is also proportionatly down and will remain so until the recovery. This will give whatever absorbtion/recovery capacity for this type of pollution our planet has, a better chance to deal with it over this time than it would have had. The amount of oil is finite but we are going to burn it all in the end, so burning it over a longer period of time has to be a better thing. perhaps we will come up with a few ideas of dealing with this type of pollution ourselves, over this time span.
The end of the world is not quiet neigh yet.

Tipsy Mac

I think it could lead to companies cutting corners as was said. However alot of companies are going bust in China and other developing countries, also shipping companies are struggling to fill ships with cargo as there's less demand for goods so it will probably balance itselft out to be pretty much the same as we are experiencing now.

Húrin

There are good arguments for both sides. My opinion is that rapid economic growth is disastrous for non-human life and especially the climate. In obvious ways it creates more land use change and fossil fuel burning, which causes more greenhous gas emissions.

But, you say, surely people are more likely to invest sustainably? Perhaps, but in a booming economy people are just as likely, or perhaps more so, to invest in unsustainable enterprises. At least in a recession people should see that if we don't get sustainable then the recession will get worse.

Also, it is in the nature of economic growth that sustainable industries will augment the unsustainable industries rather than replacing them.

Companies will cut corners, but what was stopping them doing that before? It was competitive in the boom time as well, and little was encouraging them not to cut corners.

Flyer1

How the H3LL does a slowdown result in giving us snow. You really haven't a clue about meteorology have you 311 ? Don't come on spouting ****e about things you clearly have no idea about. If you want snow, move the country a few hundred miles north.

311

Flyer1 wrote: »

How the H3LL does a slowdown result in giving us snow. You really haven't a clue about meteorology have you 311 ? Don't come on spouting ****e about things you clearly have no idea about. If you want snow, move the country a few hundred miles north.

Sorry I forgot there was children using boards aswell as mature people.

I should of used a :pac: or a at the end of my sentence.
Let me explain ,theres this thing called global warming that is effecting our climate. Every year the climate changes ever so slighty ,a factor of this is our carbon emmisions.

So when you go skiing again with your parents ,ask them where snow comes from.

gerky

Flyer1 wrote: »

How the H3LL does a slowdown result in giving us snow. You really haven't a clue about meteorology have you 311 ? Don't come on spouting ****e about things you clearly have no idea about. If you want snow, move the country a few hundred miles north.

Are you just grumpy today or are you usually this arrogant to people who did nothing to antagonise you, there's no need to be so rude to someone just asking questions.


@311
From what I've read this winter isn't supposed to as mild as last year but that mightn't mean to much as last year was quite mild.

There also some talk that as there haven't been any sun spots this last while that it could mean a colder than usual winter, I haven't read enough about it to know whether there's any truth to it or not.

Here's hoping for a nice cold/dry winter with some snow.

311

gerky wrote: »

Here's hoping for a nice cold/dry winter with some snow.

If anything it would be a nice boost to the eco system.
It's funny that the flyer mentioned meteorology ,as I actually worked at the dublin meteorlogical service for a while:rolleyes:

My own personal feelings on the envoirnment is that it's carrying a lot of moisture and it's slowing down. I think thats whats causing us to miss winters the way we do.
But obviously I'm bananas ,otherwise I wouldn't be posting here about it :pac::D

bonkey

311 wrote: »

Is there anyway that a slower world economy would be benefitial to the envoirnment ,given that people have less money to squander on excess ?

Yes, absolutely...in the same way that the eye of a hurricane is beneficial to the environment, given that it doesn't wreak the havoc that the system around has done and will do.

A brief respite - as with the eye of the storm - is ultimately worthless. The storm needs to pass / break up.

Húrin

I don't think that anybody should expect snow next winter because the economy is slowing down now. Global warming is not something we can control like that. We're certainly in for a one degree rise in temperature. The movement is about leaving it at that, not undoing it.

There may be snow but it will be for the same reason as two summers of rain: The El Nino effect.

brianthebard

Húrin wrote: »

There are good arguments for both sides. My opinion is that rapid economic growth is disastrous for non-human life and especially the climate. In obvious ways it creates more land use change and fossil fuel burning, which causes more greenhous gas emissions.

But, you say, surely people are more likely to invest sustainably? Perhaps, but in a booming economy people are just as likely, or perhaps more so, to invest in unsustainable enterprises. At least in a recession people should see that if we don't get sustainable then the recession will get worse.
.

Why should this be the case?