Climate change protests

screamer wrote: »

Nuclear baby, as an island with no natural resources that we haven’t given away, ‘‘tis the only option to give us a viable alternative to fossils.
Tax= freeze us to death to make us comply, that won’t work. We need a viable alternative

We already have a viable alternative- wind and solar. Wind is already producing up to 65% of the national grids needs. As it gets higher everyome benefits. Nuclear is not politically achievable in Ireland because Chernoybl/Three Mile/Fukishima. Nuclear will never happen here but wind already is proving itself as the viable alternative.

Blueshoe wrote: »

I don't have one. All countries would have to be in agreement with a plan in place to create sufficient renewable energy to replace fossil fuels. There is no point in our government taxing the hell out of us while the next country continues to pollute.
Big corporations and oil companies should have an environmental levy forced on them and that fund should be used globally to come up with solutions.

All countries bar the USA under Trump are in the Paris Agreement and do have a plan. Its just Ireland isn't sticking to it while lots of other countries are. The countries that don't stick to it pay fines, we 're going to be paying €600m a year soon for failing to meet the targets we signed up to. Germany, Norway et al won't be paying a penny in fines because they will meet their targets. China is now spending three times more on renewable energies that the USA are, all the while Trump extols the benefits of using "clean coal" :rolleyes:

So when you hear the words 'Carbon Tax' what it really represents is a tax on citizens to pay the fines levied upon their own governments for missing their commitments to reduce carbon emissions. Agree with you that there should be an enviromental levy on polluiting corporates, recent research said that less than 30 companies worldwide are causing more than 50% of global carbon emissions.

To ram home my point, how many people think smoking is good for you, or has no effect?

How many people think drinking alcohol is beneficial?

How many believe no exercise is a good thing?

Fast food?

Yet how many indulge all these things? The problem isn't awareness, it's human nature itself. We think short term, and to hell with everything else.

Some of these tools would want everyone driving a 1.4 litre petrol gas guzzler :rolleyes: to sell it and buy a brand new Nissan Leaf for €30k so they could save circa €14.99 in fuel costs. Depreciation on the Leaf would be zero as it lives up its own ass.

Alf Veedersane wrote: »

Yeah but no because Chernobyl.

Anyway, no point in making any effort because China.

If they build a nuclear reactor as close to London as possible, the British government will maintain it for free as the wind normally from west to east, they will sh*t in their trousers if they think anything is going wrong with it.

Wind is already producing up to 65% of the national grids needs.

It's the "up to" that's the problem.

It's not much use to someone in a hospital if there was 100% wind energy being provided six hours ago and none now.

If you look at the http://smartgriddashboard.eirgrid.com/ you can look at the performance in 15 minute increments of Irish wind generation.

You can compare wind generation with demand and it often makes for pretty poor viewing, dropping to a fraction of peak output for days at a time.

Wind power gives the appearance of doing something but by itself, it's not going to solve the problem.

Whether we get our baseload from our own nuclear plants, or somebody elses, via interconnectors to Britain or France, that is the surest way for us to have low carbon power.

NIMAN wrote: »

Saw some of the young people getting interviewed yesterday, and to be honest none of them were able to give a proper answer when asked what exactly they wanted the government to do.

There was a lot of fuzzy answers like "listen to young people", or "more", but nothing concrete. Plus I feel a lot of them sounded as if they don't understand how countries and economies work, they have this great believe there is an endless supply of money and that we can have everything we want and no-one has to pay for it.

For many I'd say it was a day off school. Nothing else.

That's what I was thinking , nice free day off. It was like they were some sort of programmed robots who only knew what sound bites to say but nothing after that.

Big thing they don't understand is the change in quality of life if we are to follow through on what they want.

Stephen15 wrote: »

Climate change and it's effects are exaggerated. The climate has changed throughout history

There goes your credibility.

Wheeliebin30 wrote: »

Protesting has turned into a vanity affair with people posting up videos on their Facebook and Instagram of them thinking they are great sticking it to the man, all for attention of course.

Protests everyday now about silly stuff,

You are missing the point here. What did you expect? That they would rock up with a 5 step plan which considers the economies desire for growth and ultimately allows this to happen while still cutting emissions.

The critical thing about the strike is that these students are correct, action needs to happen.
Maybe the parents of these children will think about the message and consider their current behaviour.
Many of them will be going in to college in the next couple of years, maybe having been involved in this, they will choose a career path to help make positive steps towards protecting the environment. Maybe having been involved in this they will look around at home and ask their parents what are they doing?
Maybe, when they start to vote in a few short years, they will pay closer attention to what are currently vacuous promises by politicians to take positive steps.

The most accurate statement I heard yesterday was a student saying that they will be the last generation who can act before the damage becomes irreversible.

Think about that. If you have children/grandchildren, what do you hope for their future?