no.1. issue of 2010

brianthebard

Obviously there are many many issues facing the green/environmental movement in the coming year, but what is the number one issue in your opinion, the one that cannot be ignored no matter who you are?

MCMLXXXIII

The number one issue is our attitude.

...and by "our" I mean everyone across the world.

Pollution is still a sign of the wealth of a city in China.
American Republicans claim God will save us all - even if we are the ones causing the problem.
All of us buy products from companies that dump waste and pollute heavily instead of organic food, clothing, etc. just because its cheaper.

We have the technology and the capacity to give ourselves wind turbines, solar panels, hydrokinetic generators, etc., but it is not going to do anyone any good until we change the minds of people across the world. We just need to convince ourselves and the people around us to see the simple cost benefit. Let's not treat our planet the same way American health care treats its patients.

Mahatma coat

the no.1 issue for the world is not gettin suckerd into Carbon Tax.

espinolman

The most important issues relating to the environment i believe we don't know about , i think there is an environmental crisis but it is not so much caused by co2 , there is something else we are not being told about . For example chemtrails , why is that being done ? Do you know ? Is it being done because there is a real environmental crisis we are not being told about !

If you don't believe me , just search the word chemtrails and look at all the pictures of them , what is going on ?

Cookie_Monster

espinolman wrote: »

The most important issues relating to the environment i believe we don't know about , i think there is an environmental crisis but it is not so much caused by co2 , there is something else we are not being told about . For example chemtrails , why is that being done ? Do you know ? Is it being done because there is a real environmental crisis we are not being told about !

If you don't believe me , just search the word chemtrails and look at all the pictures of them , what is going on ?

:rolleyes:

This is green issues not conspiracy theories

Macha

Please let's not turn this into another thread on chemtrails.

Good idea for a thread. I believe the rejection of pie-in-the-sky climate engineering and a return to the fundamentals of renewable energy and low-tech no-brainers like public transport will have to take place this year. Too much time and money is being wasted by narrow, rather than holistic thinking.

espinolman

taconnol wrote: »

Please let's not turn this into another thread on chemtrails.

Yea , lets ignore certain environmental issues and turn a blind eye to them so that we can go on our fancy holidays in our aeroplanes and shopping trips to new york , so we will all turn a blind eye to any damage to the environment caused by modern aircraft .

Macha

espinolman wrote: »

Yea , lets ignore certain environmental issues and turn a blind eye to them so that we can go on our fancy holidays in our aeroplanes and shopping trips to new york , so we will all turn a blind eye to any damage to the environment caused by modern aircraft .

I'm not going to ask again.

Pembily

MCMLXXXIII wrote: »

The number one issue is our attitude.

...and by "our" I mean everyone across the world.

Pollution is still a sign of the wealth of a city in China.
American Republicans claim God will save us all - even if we are the ones causing the problem.
All of us buy products from companies that dump waste and pollute heavily instead of organic food, clothing, etc. just because its cheaper.

We have the technology and the capacity to give ourselves wind turbines, solar panels, hydrokinetic generators, etc., but it is not going to do anyone any good until we change the minds of people across the world. We just need to convince ourselves and the people around us to see the simple cost benefit. Let's not treat our planet the same way American health care treats its patients.

I agree - I see it with too many people (even my sister at home), it's easier to throw it all into one bin than rinse and recycle!!! Supposedly it's cool to drink from a take away - with the amount of tea I drink I would use app 1500 cups a year - instead I bought a thermos, one simple act yet big impact!!! We all have our bit to play and blaming governments and focusing on things we can't personally change is useless!!!

We need to go back to basics - produce less, produce better, produce cleaner, choose cleaner / greener products, produce and design products to last longer thus reducing waste, recycle more and in general just care!!!

It is our planet at the end of the day...

quentingargan

MCMLXXXIII wrote: »

The number one issue is our attitude.

I think this is on the money. Faced with the combined imperatives of peak oil and climate change, we seem to either go into denial or paralysis. Either way our individual response is inadequate. And if we don't prioritise this as individuals, we can't expect the short-term political mindset to prioritise it either.

There are technological solutions that enable us to maintain most of the important aspects of our current civilisation and lifestyle, but if we are too slow in introducing these, then it will indeed be too late for an orderly transition to a sustainable world.

If we do grasp these challenges, then sustainable energy will be (for a while at least) the up and coming industry. In Ireland, our speciality should be wind, tidal, wave etc., and in Europe, the priority will be developing a grid infrastructure that allows renewable energy to be circulated as widely as possible to reduce the effects of localised peaks and troughs in production and consumption.

Good idea for a thread too. Well done!

spadder

The number one issue for people interested and concerned about the environment is to get the greens out of government.

They have been a thundering disgrace, best descirbed as a "mud guard for FF".

quentingargan

spadder wrote: »

The number one issue for people interested and concerned about the environment is to get the greens out of government.

Unless you can think of some reason why this would save the planet, then surely this is off-subject and belongs in the political forums?

Cheeble

No.1 IMO?

Reducing car dependency and use.

Cheeble-eers

Macha

Please no back-seat modding

John_F

number 1 issue?....waking up to reality - man made climate change






(climategate)

Funsies

Cheeble wrote: »

No.1 IMO?

Reducing car dependency and use.

Cheeble-eers

why not get some good electric cars going instead of this tired old 'stay at home, huddle up in a corner and don't do anything' anti-transport anti-freedom method of saving the planet?

quentingargan

Funsies wrote: »

why not get some good electric cars going instead of this tired old 'stay at home, huddle up in a corner and don't do anything' anti-transport anti-freedom method of saving the planet?

I've had a Citreon Berlingo Electrique for the last few years, but they're no panacea. Fine for short city commuting, or getting you to a rural bus connection, but even if their range is extended, they still need fuel. I read a few years ago (but not been able to confirm) that if we wanted to replace our current EU fleet with EVs, and power them from wind, we would need to install 65,000 megawatts of wind power every year from now to 2050. Does anyone have the source of that figure, or know what it woudl be?

I'm all for EVs, but they are only part of the solution. Reducing car dependency means vastly improving public transport links, and improving local facilities. We are finally putting the finishing touches to a motorway network which by all accounts is for an outdated mode of transport. Every time 20 cars trundle down the M1, that could be one bus. That would be a bus at least every minute most of the day. From where I live to get to Cork city, there are only a few buses every day, but if I stand on the road counting cars, even allowing for short rural hopping, I reckon there could be a bus every 15 minutes or so.

Buses that run from city to city tend to divert into every town along the way, instead of Monbiot's suggestion that buses run along the motorways and are fed by feeder buses that take you from each junction into the town and surrounding area. If we had that sort of hop-on, hop-off service that ran really regularly, and was affordable, we could make that sort of switch. Instead, buses are synonymous with waiting around for ages while three full buses pass by.

As for affordability, our bus from Bantry to Cork is €23 return for less than 100Km. It cost us €57 to take the family to Cork for the panto. It would have cost us about €12 in the car. If you already own a car, you probably can't afford to go by bus... Buses have already priced their way into the law of diminishing returns. The bus was less than half full, and Bus Eireann is talking about further curtailing services because of low take-up.

That isn't going to reduce our car dependency, is it?

Húrin

#1 priority is to stop carbon trading from being imposed on the world, and implement solutions to climate change that actually work and that do not dispossess the developing world

Cheeble

Funsies wrote: »

why not get some good electric cars going instead of this tired old 'stay at home, huddle up in a corner and don't do anything' anti-transport anti-freedom method of saving the planet?

Did you even bother to read my post?

Cheeble-eers

maniac101

A clean and reliable water supply is a big issue in Ireland. Water pollution needs to be tackled, water quality needs to be monitored and quality data made more accessible to the consumer.

Also in the last few months we've found out in our area that a secure water supply can't be relied upon if (a) it's dry, or (b) it's wet, or (c) it's cold!

Pembily

maniac101 wrote: »

A clean and reliable water supply is a big issue in Ireland. Water pollution needs to be tackled, water quality needs to be monitored and quality data made more accessible to the consumer.

Also in the last few months we've found out in our area that a secure water supply can't be relied upon if (a) it's dry, or (b) it's wet, or (c) it's cold!

Sadly due to a lack of water charges and proper metres saving and sorting out water supply and quality is not a priority as yet!!!! Will be soon, hopefully...

ConsiderThis

quentingargan wrote: »

I've had a Citreon Berlingo Electrique for the last few years, but they're no panacea. Fine for short city commuting, or getting you to a rural bus connection, but even if their range is extended, they still need fuel. I read a few years ago (but not been able to confirm) that if we wanted to replace our current EU fleet with EVs, and power them from wind, we would need to install 65,000 megawatts of wind power every year from now to 2050. Does anyone have the source of that figure, or know what it woudl be?

I'm all for EVs, but they are only part of the solution. Reducing car dependency means vastly improving public transport links, and improving local facilities. We are finally putting the finishing touches to a motorway network which by all accounts is for an outdated mode of transport. Every time 20 cars trundle down the M1, that could be one bus. That would be a bus at least every minute most of the day. From where I live to get to Cork city, there are only a few buses every day, but if I stand on the road counting cars, even allowing for short rural hopping, I reckon there could be a bus every 15 minutes or so.

Buses that run from city to city tend to divert into every town along the way, instead of Monbiot's suggestion that buses run along the motorways and are fed by feeder buses that take you from each junction into the town and surrounding area. If we had that sort of hop-on, hop-off service that ran really regularly, and was affordable, we could make that sort of switch. Instead, buses are synonymous with waiting around for ages while three full buses pass by.

As for affordability, our bus from Bantry to Cork is €23 return for less than 100Km. It cost us €57 to take the family to Cork for the panto. It would have cost us about €12 in the car. If you already own a car, you probably can't afford to go by bus... Buses have already priced their way into the law of diminishing returns. The bus was less than half full, and Bus Eireann is talking about further curtailing services because of low take-up.



That isn't going to reduce our car dependency, is it?

I'm not sure EV's are part of the solution. the amount of energy which has to be generated per km driven is likely to be astonishing, and the cost of it equally so. Couple that with the inconvenience of how long it takes to refill and electric car ( as opposed to a petrol or diesel one) , and I don't think it will even be a real replacement for the internal combustion engine.

It's interesting to see a car running on fuel cells has been brought out in the USA, and that technology seems more likely to be more flexible and better adapted to the sort of use we have come to expect from our cars, especially as the technology improves.

Macha

ConsiderThis wrote: »

I'm not sure EV's are part of the solution. the amount of energy which has to be generated per km driven is likely to be astonishing, and the cost of it equally so. Couple that with the inconvenience of how long it takes to refill and electric car ( as opposed to a petrol or diesel one) , and I don't think it will even be a real replacement for the internal combustion engine.

Actually the cost/km of an EV is incredibly low. I agree that the issues are range and charging times/locations. But EVs are most efficient in an urban settings anyway.

ConsiderThis

taconnol wrote: »

Actually the cost/km of an EV is incredibly low. I agree that the issues are range and charging times/locations. But EVs are most efficient in an urban settings anyway.

I was guessing about the cost, but one thin which has often puzzled me is heating the cabin. In a convention engine, heating is virtually free and is a bi product of the way the engine works. in an EV, (and specially considering the freezing weather of recent weeks), how is an EV heated for the occupants and to keep the windows clear of misting up?

quentingargan

ConsiderThis wrote: »

I was guessing about the cost, but one thin which has often puzzled me is heating the cabin. In a convention engine, heating is virtually free and is a bi product of the way the engine works. in an EV, (and specially considering the freezing weather of recent weeks), how is an EV heated for the occupants and to keep the windows clear of misting up?

Aha! Now you know why the Berlingo Electrique has a petrol filler. There is a wee petrol heater similar to what they use on yachts. I had an Eberspracher in my first EV. Not sure what one the Citroen uses, but it uses about 2L of petrol every few months.

In relation to your post about hydrogen cars, I can't help agreeing that, like cold fusion, it is always about 20 years off. Hydrogen is difficult to store and handle, and has to be made somehow.

The motor industry spin doctors love to say that it is made from salt water and returns to water when it is used. My understanding is that the efficiency of turning electricity into hydrogen and back into electricity again is way lower than your average NiMh battery.

ConsiderThis

quentingargan wrote: »

Aha! Now you know why the Berlingo Electrique has a petrol filler. There is a wee petrol heater similar to what they use on yachts. I had an Eberspracher in my first EV. Not sure what one the Citroen uses, but it uses about 2L of petrol every few months.

In relation to your post about hydrogen cars, I can't help agreeing that, like cold fusion, it is always about 20 years off. Hydrogen is difficult to store and handle, and has to be made somehow.

The motor industry spin doctors love to say that it is made from salt water and returns to water when it is used. My understanding is that the efficiency of turning electricity into hydrogen and back into electricity again is way lower than your average NiMh battery.

I'm not sure we are talking about the same thing as the car running on fuel cells is available now in the USA, and not 20 years off, and it's made by Honda.

Capt'n Midnight

quentingargan wrote: »

The motor industry spin doctors love to say that it is made from salt water and returns to water when it is used. My understanding is that the efficiency of turning electricity into hydrogen and back into electricity again is way lower than your average NiMh battery.

zod

ConsiderThis wrote: »

I'm not sure EV's are part of the solution. the amount of energy which has to be generated per km driven is likely to be astonishing, and the cost of it equally so. Couple that with the inconvenience of how long it takes to refill and electric car ( as opposed to a petrol or diesel one) , and I don't think it will even be a real replacement for the internal combustion engine.

It's interesting to see a car running on fuel cells has been brought out in the USA, and that technology seems more likely to be more flexible and better adapted to the sort of use we have come to expect from our cars, especially as the technology improves.

electric cars are way cheaper to run and are the future

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FcoJt2KLC9k

zod

EU rating on all packaging would be of huge benefit.

Equivalent of a plastic bag tax for ratings above a certain number and a discount for those below.

A ZERO sum gain tax in other words on packaging before people go ballistic

Capt'n Midnight

zod wrote: »

electric cars are way cheaper to run and are the future

Electric cars are so 19th century

All we need is 19th century electrical and better batteries

we're still waiting on the batteries

Gurgle

Capt'n Midnight wrote: »

That smells a little like propaganda....
Any idea where it came from originally?

zod

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=giAVYfzCzBc

McSandwich

Gurgle wrote: »

That smells a little like propaganda....
Any idea where it came from originally?

Not sure if its the same source, but its used in this presentation:

http://policy.rutgers.edu/ceeep/hydrogen/events/H2Andrews.pdf

Capt'n Midnight

Gurgle wrote: »

That smells a little like propaganda....
Any idea where it came from originally?

of course it's propoganda

image is on wikipedia

Gurgle

McSandwich wrote: »

Not sure if its the same source, but its used in this presentation:

http://policy.rutgers.edu/ceeep/hydrogen/events/H2Andrews.pdf

Look at the tag-line under the image - they got it from Wikipedia, which kinda puts the lie to the 'research' they're presenting.

(Also the gratuituous use of the phrase 'future technology')

I asks because there's no account taken for the energy and pollution involved in production of Li-ion batteries, or the limited re-usability - especially in applications where reducing capacity over the battery's lifetime is a major disadvantage.

Your 200km battery pack will only carry you 50km after the 300th recharging.

McSandwich

Gurgle wrote: »

Look at the tag-line under the image - they got it from Wikipedia, which kinda puts the lie to the 'research' they're presenting.

(Also the gratuituous use of the phrase 'future technology')

I asks because there's no account taken for the energy and pollution involved in production of Li-ion batteries, or the limited re-usability - especially in applications where reducing capacity over the battery's lifetime is a major disadvantage.

Your 200km battery pack will only carry you 50km after the 300th recharging.

Valid points, however the various technologies (and their efficiencies) will improve with further investment and commercial success. The evolution of petrol and diesel engines to date is testament to this.

Lithium batteries are less polluting than Lead or Nickel and can be recycled - but dumping is easier.

As for battery life, there are various approaches to overcoming this problem, including:

1. Improve energy storage technologies (lab tests have achieved 300,000 cycles for Li-on).
2. Install bigger, higher capacity, batteries than required.
3. Restrict range and maximum speed (a strategy best suited to hybrids).
4. Again with hybrids - ensure that the battery is charged in a way which prolongs its usable life.

http://www.hybridcars.com/battery-toxicity.html

http://www.altenergystocks.com/archives/2009/09/toyota_tests_and_rejects_lithiumion_batteries_for_the_prius_1.html

http://www.ucd.ie/earth/seminars/16_17apr09_ws_paper.pdf

http://www.ucd.ie/earth/seminars/16_17apr09_ws_presentation.pdf

quentingargan

Cheeble wrote: »

No.1 IMO?

Reducing car dependency and use.

Cheeble-eers

I think the complications with electric cars shown in this post bear out Cheeble-eers' point that reduced car dependency is the priority.

Also, the embodied energy required to manufacture new cars can be as much as the energy used in its lifetime. So can we honestly say that changing the fleet to EVs or any other car is the solution?

Having owned two EVs in the last 15 years, I would still maintain that they are no panacea.

Gurgle

McSandwich wrote: »

Valid points, however the various technologies (and their efficiencies) will improve with further investment and commercial success. The evolution of petrol and diesel engines to date is testament to this.

This is the crux of the issue, for sustainable motoring we're still at the shotgun stage - hit everything, see what falls down.

Problem is of course that every 'opinion' available on the subject is commissioned (and therefore owned) by one company or another, so whatever they're peddling is the best answer.

My money is still on bio-diesel for the medium term (20-50 years), for the simple reason that the global distribution system can cover it with feck all investment.

All we need is an oily (GM) crop that thrives on sea-water, and the Sahara / Gobi / Wherever take over from the oil-fields.
Power / efficiency / weight / storage / safety of the various alternative solutions will take another while to sort out.

McSandwich

Gurgle wrote: »

This is the crux of the issue, for sustainable motoring we're still at the shotgun stage - hit everything, see what falls down.

Problem is of course that every 'opinion' available on the subject is commissioned (and therefore owned) by one company or another, so whatever they're peddling is the best answer.

My money is still on bio-diesel for the medium term (20-50 years), for the simple reason that the global distribution system can cover it with feck all investment.

All we need is an oily (GM) crop that thrives on sea-water, and the Sahara / Gobi / Wherever take over from the oil-fields.
Power / efficiency / weight / storage / safety of the various alternative solutions will take another while to sort out.

There is a lot of research into producing biofuels from algae (even cleaning polluted water as a side effect). Like you say, it could lead to a quick oil replacement - and not not only as a fuel. However, the issues regarding commercial ownership apply to biofuels too - especially when the crop is genetically modified (patents, etc.)..

djpbarry

McSandwich wrote: »

There is a lot of research into producing biofuels from algae (even cleaning polluted water as a side effect).

A fungus by the name of Gliocladium roseum (a household name - I'm sure you're all familiar with it) has recently been found to produce diesel-like compounds ('myco-diesel') under certain conditions:

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn15110-fungal-diesel-could-revolutionise-fuel-production.html

air

The big issue of this year will be the same as the big issue of this century.

OVERPOPULATION

All the so called green issues that we face are caused by human overpopulation, however along as governments predicate all economic policy on growth then nobody will ever admit it.