RTE Climate change program What Planet Are You On?

juniorfarmer

Any ye guys watched the game changer on Netflix?

Wanderer78

Big Ears wrote:

I watched one episode of this during the week, and it was clear the programme had an agenda.

Err emm, maybe the agenda is, we must make changes as we're having serious negative effects on our planet, I'm only guessing though.

Electric power creation via fossil fuels is believed to more efficient and less harmful to the environment than the accumulated output from individual fossil fuelled vehicles, hence the push for electric cars, there's obviously a big push towards moving electric power creation towards alternatives as well

Big Ears

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Err emm, maybe the agenda is, we must make changes as we're having serious negative effects on our planet, I'm only guessing though.

Electric power creation via fossil fuels is believed to more efficient and less harmful to the environment than the accumulated output from individual fossil fuelled vehicles, hence the push for electric cars, there's obviously a big push towards moving electric power creation towards alternatives as well

I think you may have missed my point.

If meat is a problem due to CO2 (and not because you don't like the concept of people eating meat), then having alternatives which require being shipped here from far away may not be the solution.
They ignores the carbon footprint of shipping foods completely on the programme.

Yes Electric cars produce less emmisions than ICE cars. However how many years do you have to be driving an electric car, to offset the CO2 emitted to produce that new car for you ?
I don't have an answer for that (although someone on this thread might).
Do you not feel it's relevant to inform people it'll take 3,5,15 years (whatever it is) at x mileage to offset the cost of producing a new car ?
That's if the goal is to actually lower emissions and not just to bitch at people and feel superior to others.

jaymla627

juniorfarmer wrote: »

Any ye guys watched the game changer on Netflix?

Interesting fun fact about The director James Cameron of Games changer is that he has invested a small fortune in his own vegan food processing facility and continues to do so, like I have been saying if you follow the money you'll see what the whole climate change rethrotic is all about

tabby aspreme

juniorfarmer wrote: »

Any ye guys watched the game changer on Netflix?

Mario Rosenstock had a discussion about it a few minutes ago, the panel ripped it apart, particularly about the people behind it and the producers vested interests

Wanderer78

Big Ears wrote:

If meat is a problem due to CO2 (and not because you don't like the concept of people eating meat), then having alternatives which require being shipped here from far away may not be the solution. They ignores the carbon footprint of shipping foods completely on the programme.

Ah no, I'm aware of the point you were making, unfortunately we re fossil fuel junkies, probably everything we consume has some connection to their burning, such is the complexity of this problem, but changes must be made at both the individual level, and at the systematic and institutional level, I think the latter is gonna be the bigger and more complex of the two to change.

An astonishing level of investment is gonna be needed to do this, but my fear is, it may not occur, I feel too much enffices is being made to try convince the individual to change, ultimately making it the individuals responsibility, and ultimately costing the individual, hence why I think the approach of carbon taxation could very well fail it's main objectives, there's only so much the individual can do and afford.

emaherx

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Electric power creation via fossil fuels is believed to more efficient and less harmful to the environment than the accumulated output from individual fossil fuelled vehicles, hence the push for electric cars, there's obviously a big push towards moving electric power creation towards alternatives as well

Not according to recent study from Germany which found the carbon footprint of electric vehicles powered by fossil fuel power stations to be much higher. The only country in Europe where electric vehicles have a smaller footprint than ICE vehicles is France due to mostly nuclear power.

I suspect your statement above was true, but ICE vehicles have much lower carbon emissions compared to a few years ago.

jaymla627

Big Ears wrote: »

I think you may have missed my point.

If meat is a problem due to CO2 (and not because you don't like the concept of people eating meat), then having alternatives which require being shipped here from far away may not be the solution.
They ignores the carbon footprint of shipping foods completely on the programme.

Yes Electric cars produce less emmisions than ICE cars. However how many years do you have to be driving an electric car, to offset the CO2 emitted to produce that new car for you ?
I don't have an answer for that (although someone on this thread might).
Do you not feel it's relevant to inform people it'll take 3,5,15 years (whatever it is) at x mileage to offset the cost of producing a new car ?
That's if the goal is to actually lower emissions and not just to bitch at people and feel superior to others.

Think its seven years, problem with electric vehicles is that they require huge amounts of cobalt that isn't easily available and has propagated modern day slavery out in the Congo with an estimated 35,000 children been affected, who shift throw rocks all day long looking for pieces with cobalt attached that they then put into a bag and hauled to a collection point, cobalt is a highly poisonous substance with it estimated alot of these kids wont live to 30, it can be mechanically extracted but costs to much

Wanderer78

emaherx wrote:

Not according to recent study from Germany which found the carbon footprint of electric vehicles powered by fossil fuel power stations to be much higher. The only country in Europe where electric vehicles have a smaller footprint than ICE vehicles is France due to mostly nuclear power.

Thank you, that's interesting, I'm still convinced that we re probably better off moving our cars towards electric, but I wonder, what percentage of citizens will actually be able to afford it, my gut is telling me, a large proportion simply won't be able to, particularly if current trends remain, i.e rising costs of living, particularly in relation to housing/accommodation etc. Speaking of nuclear, I'm also not convinced that renewables can fill the gap of our power needs, I think we should be also considering nuclear, but good luck with that one in ireland.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Big Ears wrote: »

I think you may have missed my point.

If meat is a problem due to CO2 (and not because you don't like the concept of people eating meat), then having alternatives which require being shipped here from far away may not be the solution.
They ignores the carbon footprint of shipping foods completely on the programme.

Yes Electric cars produce less emmisions than ICE cars. However how many years do you have to be driving an electric car, to offset the CO2 emitted to produce that new car for you ?
I don't have an answer for that (although someone on this thread might).
Do you not feel it's relevant to inform people it'll take 3,5,15 years (whatever it is) at x mileage to offset the cost of producing a new car ?
That's if the goal is to actually lower emissions and not just to bitch at people and feel superior to others.

It all depends on how you define emissions. The current in vogue definition is that Ag here emits 30% of GHGs which is true up to a point. That's gross emissions which is accurate when comparing all emitters but is hugely overestimating net emissions fro Ag.

That gross figure is a Life Cycle Assessment taking all emissions needed for inputs and transport included in it, unlike, for example aviation where the figure used is that of fuel emitted only and nothing added for building and repairing planes and airports. This is a similar comparison to the now discredited IPCC report which placed Ag as having a higher emission levels that transport and responsible for 51% of GHGs.

There isn't, as yet, a credit to be deducted from the Ag figure for the CO2 absorbed to produce the plants that we eat and provide the base material for the grass and crop residues that ruminants consume to produce the foods we eat.

It doesn't matter in the least for the rest of the emissions that Ireland produce because they don't consume any or very little CO2 to be produced.

Agriculture, though demonised as a huge emitter, is also the ONLY consumer of the CO2 that our society produces but that doesn't fit the narrative that seems to be fashionable atm.

And that's before we get as far as the sequestration of carbon in grass, crops and soils.

Be careful, very, very careful of the figures being used and the motivation for the use of those figures.

lalababa

Didn't see any rte stuff so can't possibly comment.
But all these twoing and frowing arguments about little things like avocados and eating meat are worthless. There will always be extremists on both sides, eg extreme vegans v. climate change deniers.
The general thing is that society's habits will have to drastically change,
to more sustainable models.
Energy production & consumption,
Waste production & waste recycling,
Pollution & habitat degradation.

lalababa

Sorry if my last post seems condescending🌞
Also if they farming community got behind in both voice and vote in support of the alternatives to veganism pushing climate change action. Such as
Wind & solar power action.
Planting a s**t load of trees.
Electric vehicles and proper public transport in the cities.
And other stuff......that would push the 'lets get rid of a s**t load of ruminants to save the planet' agenda out of the limelight.
That said, we could do with a few less cattle around the place..it might bring up the prices.

Buford T. Justice XIX

An interesting graphic on different sources of GHGs.
https://twitter.com/countcarbon/status/1188769124585017346?s=19

emaherx

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Thank you, that's interesting, I'm still convinced that we re probably better off moving our cars towards electric, but I wonder, what percentage of citizens will actually be able to afford it, my gut is telling me, a large proportion simply won't be able to, particularly if current trends remain, i.e rising costs of living, particularly in relation to housing/accommodation etc. Speaking of nuclear, I'm also not convinced that renewables can fill the gap of our power needs, I think we should be also considering nuclear, but good luck with that one in ireland.

Not sure electric is the complete answer, not with current battery technology. There is lots of environmental and human abuse in the sourcing of raw materials.

There are lots of alternatives to current fossil fuel used for vehicles. Hydrogen/fuel cells, bio methane and plant oil and many more. We would probably be better off with a mix of technologies or we could end up stretching another of the Earth's finite resources. Lithium and Cobalt for batteries could be the new oil crisis.

Timmaay

Wanderer78 wrote: »

Speaking of nuclear, I'm also not convinced that renewables can fill the gap of our power needs, I think we should be also considering nuclear, but good luck with that one in ireland.

Ireland will start receiving alot more nuclear generated electricity with another grid connector between Ireland and France just announced (however France will also receive wind generated electricity from Ireland when it's windy here!), worldwide China and India are still building more uranium nuclear reactors, however alongside this significant research is going into thorium nuclear power as a medium term solution in both these countries (thorium has alot less nuclear waste than uranium, and is more abundant), the long term holy grail in future energy generation is nuclear fusion, despite the running joke being this is only 30 years away for each of the last like 50years, they are now making significant progress on a new experiment fusion plant in the south of France at the minute.

Wanderer78

emaherx wrote: »

Not sure electric is the complete answer, not with current battery technology. There is lots of environmental and human abuse in the sourcing of raw materials.

There are lots of alternatives to current fossil fuel used for vehicles. Hydrogen/fuel cells, bio methane and plant oil and many more. We would probably be better off with a mix of technologies or we could end up stretching another of the Earth's finite resources. Lithium and Cobalt for batteries could be the new oil crisis.

yea id completely agree, as many alternatives to fossil fuels should be investigated, raw material mining certainly is fraught with questionably ethical practices, it always has been

Wanderer78

Timmaay wrote: »

Ireland will start receiving alot more nuclear generated electricity with another grid connector between Ireland and France just announced (however France will also receive wind generated electricity from Ireland when it's windy here!), worldwide China and India are still building more uranium nuclear reactors, however alongside this significant research is going into thorium nuclear power as a medium term solution in both these countries (thorium has alot less nuclear waste than uranium, and is more abundant), the long term holy grail in future energy generation is nuclear fusion, despite the running joke being this is only 30 years away for each of the last like 50years, they are now making significant progress on a new experiment fusion plant in the south of France at the minute.

im aware of thorium research, its actually what i was eluding to earlier

high_king

emaherx wrote: »

Not sure electric is the complete answer, not with current battery technology. There is lots of environmental and human abuse in the sourcing of raw materials.

Exactly buying 40 grand cars every couple of years is hardly environmentally friendly, and if every switched to electric cars we'd need either more fossil fueled plants or nuclear. It's as stupid as the Green Party telling us all that low Co2 diesel cars were the way to go back in 2008.

bogman_bass

Odelay wrote: »

I’d give up my right hand before I’d lose the dishwasher.

Moved into a new house with the girlfriend 4 months ago. Haven’t used the dishwasher yet

Welding Rod

bogman_bass wrote: »

Moved into a new house with the girlfriend 4 months ago. Haven’t used the dishwasher yet

What will you do when she stops doing the wash up?

riffmongous

I didn't see the original program but there was a follow-up radio program up on RTE today, far too short unfortunately

https://www.rte.ie/lifestyle/food/2019/1115/1091221-climate-and-food-can-dietary-changes-improve-the-environment/

SuperTortoise

Caught 10 mins of this last week could'nt watch any more, there's such an obvious bias within RTE, no balance at all, cows are to blame no mention of how much carbon is sequestered in our land every year though.

einn32

SuperTortoise wrote: »

Caught 10 mins of this last week could'nt watch any more, there's such an obvious bias within RTE, no balance at all, cows are to blame no mention of how much carbon is sequestered in our land every year though.

I've tried to limit my listening and viewing of RTE the last while and I feel better off!

Say my name

einn32 wrote: »

I've tried to limit my listening and viewing of RTE the last while and I feel better off!

I honestly think they've become a shock watch to see if they are still relevant anymore. The reaction that follows they use as a guide on how many people watch it anymore.
They really are stuffed with all the online competition.

The only national media I'd regularly follow would be newstalk radio after that it's online stuff.

Dakota Dan

Over on BBC you have that Liz Bonnin demonising meat, one UK farmer already after calling her out on it. I wonder what's the impact of pumping up your lips.

https://www.irishmirror.ie/showbiz/irish-showbiz/liz-bonnin-meatathreat-toourplanet-bbc-20909835

toleratethis

einn32 wrote: »

I've tried to limit my listening and viewing of RTE the last while and I feel better off!

Podcasts for the van here.

Tablet/phone + internet or reading for at home.

Great for blood pressure.

davidk1394

Debate on radio 1 now

einn32

toleratethis wrote: »

Podcasts for the van here.

Tablet/phone + internet or reading for at home.

Great for blood pressure.

Spotify here during the day at work. Audiobooks too are great. YouTube in the evenings usually instead of the TV. I actually learn things which are useful from the farming channels and mechanic channels.

patsy_mccabe

einn32 wrote: »

I've tried to limit my listening and viewing of RTE the last while and I feel better off!

If it wasn't for their GAA coverage and other limited sport coverage, I don't think I'd watch it either.

Buford T. Justice XIX

You can register your complaint below.
https://twitter.com/gingerbreadmiss/status/1197580895005421572?s=19