RTE Climate change program What Planet Are You On?

NcdJd

emaherx wrote: »

The Irish times on the anti-animal farming bandwaggon too.
https://www.irishtimes.com/news/ireland/irish-news/like-it-or-not-climate-change-will-make-everyone-change-their-lives-1.4376743

Apparently electric cars and oat milk are the future.

I think electric cars will basically fade away once hydrogen gets going.

https://www.electrive.com/2020/10/06/20-h2-fuel-cell-buses-for-birmingham-uk/

Only a matter of time for cars, trucks and tractors?

emaherx

_Brian wrote: »

There’s allot to like though.

According to that article I’m getting a cycle path to town here in rural cavan AND public transport passing my house so I don’t have to bring my car. When I’ve these things I’ll consider to eat less beef and might try oat milk. But I’ll wait for the promised cycle path and public transport first.

Ah give over, you'll not be on your bike because you'll have all of the hedge row money to fuel your SUV.

_Brian

emaherx wrote: »

Ah give over, you'll not be on your bike because you'll have all of the hedge row money to fuel your SUV.

Maybe I’ll buy a better bike ?

gozunda

NcdJd wrote: »

You'd want to have the septic tank cleaned out before starting that diet. Only one day of the seven has spuds in it. Shameful. Nothing about the methane emitted from rice production or the fact that most of the ingredients are not grown locally in the country.

A lot of food consumed. I only have two meals a day but I suppose you'd need three of those dishes to feel full.

According to the blurb - the founders (the
Stordalens) of the EAT sect / group - don't particularly like root vegetables and these are therefore not included in their "Planetary Health Diet". So no spuds, no turnip etc.

But exactly wtf RTE/V is doing promoting an extreme 'diet' which has not only been debunked on nutritional and scientific grounds but also a diet which the WHO have refused to endorse it- is beyond comprehension tbh.

Buford T. Justice XIX

An interesting one to keep an eye on next year, both in terms of NO2 emissions in Ag falling and how they frame Ag emissions as a larger proportion of much lower emissions.
https://twitter.com/franmcnulty/status/1316069921307066368?s=19

gozunda

From the bmj site. A response to the planetary diet advocates - RTE needs to take note ...

Re: WHO pulls support from initiative promoting global move to plant based foods

"[Willett and Rockström] also disagreed with the assertion that their diet would destroy culinary traditions around the world. “Flexibility to adapt to local diets is inherent in the reference dietary targets,” they wrote.

This is untrue. In the first place, the reference targets only allow for a very low intake of starchy root vegetables. In many parts of the world - including among the famously long-lived Okinawans, but also across Africa and those parts of the South Pacific still minimally impacted by dietary transitions to modern diseases - such foods are a major component of the diet.

Perhaps the thinking is that restricting such foods will increase dependence on grains, which they piously hope will be eaten as wholegrains. However, all these populations, as well as the Irish before the potato famine, were able to avoid epidemics of non-communicable diseases before any grains arrived as products of colonisation.

In the second place, whereas modern populations use cooking fats such as lard, ghee, tallow, and coconut oil the plan is to replace these with potentially very high intakes of polyunsaturated oils, despite recent evidence that polyunsaturated vegetable fats are toxic to beneficial intestinal microbes and associated with an increased risk of skin cancers.

In the third place, some regions are suited to the production of meat and dairy rather than plant crops; the detrimental effects of transitions to plant crops, with loss of topsoil, nutrients, and expense in fossil fuels, means that such transitions are unlikely to be sustainable (it is noteworthy that planetary health considerations in Eat Lancet were post-hoc justifications - the idea of what is a "healthy diet" came first, and not surprisingly, given the preponderance of vegans and vegetarians on the committee, it was a "plant-based" one.

I would have more sympathy with the statement "“We live in a world where more than 820 million people have insufficient food and many more consume low quality diets. Adoption of the dietary targets would greatly improve the nutrition and health status of most people on the planet.” if the authors had not completely undermined it by making their limited rations of animal foods entirely optional. A small increase in animal foods, as the Ethiopian minister pointed out, can make a huge improvement to the lives of children eating plant-based diets due to poverty. Wartime rationing in the UK aimed to put a minimal amount of affordable meat on everyone's table; sectors of the population unable to afford meat before could add it to the menu (wartime wage increases helped too). Civilian death rates declined as a result. Such a system for the developing world seems reasonable. However, it is not clear how eating less meat in, say, the UK or New Zealand puts more meat on the table in Ethiopia. The carbon cost of flying it around the world to the billions of people that need more meat surely rules that out, especially if production in the meat-exporting countries is meant to decrease.

I suggest that people eat whatever animal and plant foods grow near them, and use the whole animal - for example, using fats avoids the increased demand for palm and soy plantations that is an important cause of deforestation. Using offal as a source of micronutrients decreases the need for plant crops with a high water content, and thus a high land use and carbon transport cost per calorie. Feeding the inedible parts of plants to animals allows us to extract more nutrition from plants than we can purely by ourselves. And so on - the traditional way of doing things that was disrupted from the 1970s onwards by the flood of epidemiological scare stories generated in large part from Dr Willett's research, which were never really proven to be true by any experimental intervention, helping to drive a far more wasteful - and unhealthy - approach to cooking, eating and food production.

]


https://www.bmj.com/content/365/bmj.l1700/rapid-responses

NcdJd

Fckin oddballs...confinement loaf territory... if I see you nibble that turnip I'll ring the food bureau of investigation....I take it there's a money trail behind all of this gozunda...

The arrogance of advising diverse cultures around the world what they should eat after building up local food production practices over 1000s of years to suit the local soil and climate by a group of wealthy individuals based in some office in Norway...

Nothing better than a good new season turnip mashed with a couple of rashers and the grease poured over it...

The EAT food Nazis can go shove their Mexican avocados up their asses

alps

Buford T. Justice XIX wrote: »

An interesting one to keep an eye on next year, both in terms of NO2 emissions in Ag falling and how they frame Ag emissions as a larger proportion of much lower emissions.
https://twitter.com/franmcnulty/status/1316069921307066368?s=19

Spot on....can see it in print already

gozunda

NcdJd wrote: »

Fckin oddballs...confinement loaf territory... if I see you nibble that turnip I'll ring the food bureau of investigation....I take it there's a money trail behind all of this gozunda...

The arrogance of advising diverse cultures around the world what they should eat after building up local food production practices over 1000s of years to suit the local soil and climate by a group of wealthy individuals based in some office in Norway...

Nothing better than a good new season turnip mashed with a couple of rashers and the grease poured over it...

The EAT food Nazis can go shove their Mexican avocados up their asses

There is and arrogance is right ...

EAT started as an initiative within the Stordalen Foundation portfolio in 2013. The Stordalen Foundation is today one of the main funders of the EAT Foundation, established in 2016.

The Foundation was established by Gunhild and Petter Anker Stordalen. Petter Stordalen is a Norwegian billionaire businessman, hotel and property developer and self-proclaimed environmentalist. He has an estimated net worth of US$1.3 billion stemming from investments in hotels, shopping centers and property.

This is Mr Stordalen in Las Vegas last year when he visited the Heart Attack Grill and ate an Octuple Bypass Burger, made up of a stack of eight individual beef patties and 20 rashers of bacon and then posted the photos on social media ...



One rule for themselves and fek everyone else

NcdJd

gozunda wrote: »

There is and arrogance is right ...

This is Mr Stordalen in Las Vegas last year when he visited the Heart Attack Grill and ate an Octuple Bypass Burger, made up of a stack of eight individual beef patties and 20 rashers of bacon and then posted the photos on social media ...



One rule for themselves and fek everyone else

Not much lettuce on that. I'd say he got the 1000 yard stare off the thunderbug for that.

RandomViewer

Are RTE intending to push the wee lad as the next child eco prodigy?

NcdJd

RandomViewer wrote: »

Are RTE intending to push the wee lad as the next child eco prodigy?

Never thought I'd say this but eco eye is quite good tonight. Talking about biogas from grass. Not farmer bashing but offering an alternative outlet for grass and slurry.

Birdnuts

NcdJd wrote: »

Never thought I'd say this but eco eye is quite good tonight. Talking about biogas from grass. Not farmer bashing but offering an alternative outlet for grass and slurry.

Sounds good in theory but would need proper assessment in terms of "unintended consequences" - one of them being a further expansion of intensive silage production which would negate any environmental benefits for obvious reasons. I would prefer to see these digestors concentrate on the likes of slurry and other agri/food waste.

NcdJd

Birdnuts wrote: »

Sounds good in theory but would need proper assessment in terms of "unintended consequences" - one of them being a further expansion of intensive silage production which would negate any environmental benefits for obvious reasons. I would prefer to see these digestors concentrate on the likes of slurry and other agri/food waste.

Did you see the pig farmer in kildare, the amount of food waste he gets is shocking. Yeap I agree but thought it was interesting in how they do it. There was a lad up north who takes in slurry and once the gas is got out it what's left over is supposed to be more potent nitrogen wise than the actual slurry.

Buford T. Justice XIX

Something to keep in mind when discussing the push to manufactured plant foods. It's all about the profit margins.
https://twitter.com/fleroy1974/status/1316477360930258944?s=19

I emailed a senior figure in the government and asked why we arent retrofitting cars with more carbon efficient options and got no reply.

The real answer to climate change is for us in the west to consume less not simply shift to so called green options that front load the carbon impact like electric cars etc.

We should seriously consider cutting out excessive travel especially cruises, eating local seasonal veg/protein, reducing food waste (food waste in landfill generates massive amounts of methane, this gas could be recycled and should be), cutting down on intensive activities in agri, working from home

Bass Reeves

Birdnuts wrote: »

Sounds good in theory but would need proper assessment in terms of "unintended consequences" - one of them being a further expansion of intensive silage production which would negate any environmental benefits for obvious reasons. I would prefer to see these digestors concentrate on the likes of slurry and other agri/food waste.

You would also have to question the economics of using grass in bio digesters. Grass is a bulky wet product. I replied about 10years ago to an advert looking for it. To grow a crop of grass you have to be replacing 80-100N, 30P and 100k for spring production with mostly artificial fertilizer.

Over a season you be using 200+ N, 70-80P and over 200k/acre. That 11 bags of 18-6-12 and two bags of MOP as well as a ton of ground lime. Add in diesel drawing and cutting it and it not adding anything to carbon reduction

Buford T. Justice XIX

Might interest some, a seminar on recognising the different effects of different GHGs on climate.
https://twitter.com/farmersjournal/status/1316679015231561728?s=19
As an added incentive, listening to it will trigger John Gibbons so it looks good:)

RandomViewer

NcdJd wrote: »

I think electric cars will basically fade away once hydrogen gets going.

https://www.electrive.com/2020/10/06/20-h2-fuel-cell-buses-for-birmingham-uk/

Only a matter of time for cars, trucks and tractors?

If the UK don't take to electric cars in large numbers I can't see the manufacturer's bothering making right hand drive models just for us,

Mooooo

RandomViewer wrote: »

If the UK don't take to electric cars in large numbers I can't see the manufacturer's bothering making right hand drive models just for us,

Volvo are working on a patent to allow cars switch from left to right hand drive, I'm sure more will come up with it esp with electrics when transmission tunnels etc won't be such an issue

_Brian

RandomViewer wrote: »

If the UK don't take to electric cars in large numbers I can't see the manufacturer's bothering making right hand drive models just for us,

Us and Japan

RandomViewer

_Brian wrote: »

Us and Japan

Huge spec differences, Japanese very loyal to home marques, would pay to ship from OZ, saying that big V8 Holden or Ford Ute would be a nice prezzie

Kickstart1.3

RandomViewer wrote: »

If the UK don't take to electric cars in large numbers I can't see the manufacturer's bothering making right hand drive models just for us,

Using that intelligent thought process I guess they will not make them for the likes of India, Australia, Japan, Southern Africa, Caribbean and more. Only about 30% of the world's population drives on the left side of the road.

NcdJd

RandomViewer wrote: »

If the UK don't take to electric cars in large numbers I can't see the manufacturer's bothering making right hand drive models just for us,

Not much if a car industry left in the UK now. Brexit put the nail in the cofin on that over the last 24 months.

Even car parts aren't going to be coming from the UK as they are at present from UK distribution warehouses. 24 hour delay due to customs clearance, alot of the car companies here are looking to bypass the UK once this comes in. To complex due to multiple origins on the same parts, delays at ports etc. One company that owns alot of different models even suggested to fly over the UK into Ireland post brexit.

NcdJd

NcdJd wrote: »

Not much if a car industry left in the UK now. Brexit put the nail in the cofin on that over the last 24 months.

Even car parts aren't going to be coming from the UK as they are at present from UK distribution warehouses. 24 hour delay due to customs clearance, alot of the car companies here are looking to bypass the UK once this comes in. To complex due to multiple origins on the same parts, delays at ports etc. One company that owns alot of different models even suggested to fly over the UK into Ireland post brexit.

A lot of the big players in the car industry want to move towards autonomous cars provided in a subscription service

When autonomous vehicles take off you could pretty much get a contract like for your phone and request a lift each time. They would have to have depots in each town / city etc.

That model won't suit people in rural areas

NcdJd

[Deleted User] wrote: »

A lot of the big players in the car industry want to move towards autonomous cars provided in a subscription service

When autonomous vehicles take off you could pretty much get a contract like for your phone and request a lift each time. They would have to have depots in each town / city etc.

That model won't suit people in rural areas

I still think autonomous vehicles are years away from being safe enough to introduce into basically the chaos that is human behaviour on roads or whats in a pedestrians head. The largest supercomputer on the planet may be able to calculate a list of scenarios that predict my next move but there will always be something it can't predict.

Fields are grand but streets with unpredictable drivers and computers with a list of expected responses based on parameters programmed by a human ? There's something they've missed lurking out there.

NcdJd

NcdJd wrote: »

I still think autonomous vehicles are years away from being safe enough to introduce into basically the chaos that is human behaviour on roads or whats in a pedestrians head. The largest supercomputer on the planet may be able to calculate a list of scenarios that predict my next move but there will always be something it can't predict.

Fields are grand but streets with unpredictable drivers and computers with a list of expected responses based on parameters programmed by a human ? There's something they've missed lurking out there.

All Tesla cars are monitoring all driving scenarios and reporting back unusual scenarios to tesla like strange junctions, driver behaviour etc

Its machine learning so the logic dosen't have to be programmed and it can learn itself.

They were saying the end of 2020 but have pushed it out again

Human error is the problem. Over 1 million people die on the roads each year. If you could eliminate human error through automation a lot of lives could be saved

Bass Reeves

[Deleted User] wrote: »

All Tesla cars are monitoring all driving scenarios and reporting back unusual scenarios to tesla like strange junctions, driver behaviour etc

Its machine learning so the logic dosen't have to be programmed and it can learn itself.

They were saying the end of 2020 but have pushed it out again

Human error is the problem. Over 1 million people die on the roads each year. If you could eliminate human error through automation a lot of lives could be saved

Problem is if they get a line of code wrong. As well acceptance will be slow. The first use of automation will be in places where risk is low in farm machinery. At present they are trialing road train type vehicles where a convey of trucks can travel a distance with only one driver in charge. They have trialed a two truck unit. These could be used on motorway as a convey type vehicle. However we are probably a bit away from acceptance of them moving into build up area's.

emaherx

Bass Reeves wrote: »

Problem is if they get a line of code wrong. As well acceptance will be slow. The first use of automation will be in places where risk is low in farm machinery. At present they are trialing road train type vehicles where a convey of trucks can travel a distance with only one driver in charge. They have trialed a two truck unit. These could be used on motorway as a convey type vehicle. However we are probably a bit away from acceptance of them moving into build up area's.

First use?

There is over 1400 autonomous vehicles operating on public roads in the US.

Deleted User

Deleted User wrote: »

A lot of the big players in the car industry want to move towards autonomous cars provided in a subscription service

When autonomous vehicles take off you could pretty much get a contract like for your phone and request a lift each time. They would have to have depots in each town / city etc.

That model won't suit people in rural areas

Technology is turning us into nothing more than economic units to be bled white. Think of the effect, it's like the new tractors you never really own due to the tech inside. It removes independent options to make ones own choices. People will be forced into cities as they won't have options like they have now, affordable secondhand vehicles and such.