denismc wrote: » Lawnmowers and petrol driven garden equipment are huge polluters, not just CO2 but pollutants such as benzenes NOx. Figures from the U.S in 2011:approximately 26.7 million tons of pollutants were emitted by GLGE (VOC=461,800; CO=5,793,200; NOx=68,500, PM10=20,700; CO2=20,382,400), accounting for 24%−45% of all nonroad gasoline emissions (GLGE = petrol driven lawn equipment) 2 stroke engines seem to the biggest polluters. So maybe consider changing to battery and electric powered garden equipment or better still let some of your garden grow wild.
Gangu wrote: » Living a more sustainable life in a climate change emergency ... Do you have any tips?
Atlantic Dawn wrote: » And Green Party Policy circa 2008... Drive a diesel car in a built up area (kills humans) Get a wood burning stove in a built up area (kills humans)
Long-haul flights emit huge amounts of CO2 – and until aircraft use more fuel-efficient technologies there’s no getting away from that ‘inconvenient truth’.... driving a petrol car ...the emissions are about the same, kilometre for kilometre. For instance, a return trip from London to Bilbao in a 2L petrol engine car produces 0.26 tonnes of CO2, while a return flight produces 0.28 tonne
gozunda wrote: » • Have fewer (or no) children (equaling, for someone in a rich country) an estimated 58.6 tons of C02 equivalent per child, per year
Macha wrote: » Eat less meat and dairy and stop flying. Those are the two best things you can do to help cut your personal carbon emissions. The rest is largely window dressing. And the best thing you can do for system change, is be a climate voter, ie vote for candidates who have strong policies and PRIORITISE climate action. You said not political but we are not going to recycle our way out of climate breakdown. You either accept its an emergency and act accordingly or you don't.
Water John wrote: » The biggest offender in air transport are the many weekend trips, sorry Mikey O'Leary. Our beef, whilst a contributor, is more carbon efficient than anywhere else in the world. The whole farming and soil carbon capture needs a lot of further research. Certainly high intensity farming has a negative carbon footprint.
Graces7 wrote: » Fascinating thread; thank you. what comes across most to me as a near-octagenarian is that many of the excellent ideas are how we lived in the 40s and 50s. No " white goods" for most folk, and yes we washed by hand; no central heating, etc and foreign holidays if any were by ship not air. Now I live much as we did then. No car . Washing by hand and in cold water. Growing as much as I can. No oil heating. Just makes economic and environmental sense and is no hardship. second childhood.. oh and buying from thrift/charity shops To those defeatist folk here, " many a mickle maks a muckle."
Sir Guy who smiles wrote: » I am repeating myself from another thread, but we should remember that it is not just flying for pleasure that causes problems; there is an awful lot of business travel that might not be necessary in this age of video-conferencing.
Day Lewin wrote: » Eat local, not imported. WEAR local is another challenge: most of us are dressed from head to feet in plastic, these days. The only local textiles would be wool and linen, maybe a little leather. .
vladmydad wrote: Oh so it’s climate “emergency†now lol. Folks just live your life and enjoy it. Drive your car, go on as many holidays as you can and eat all the wonderful food you can. I promise the world is not going to end and humanity will not destroy the planet. Human ingenuity and technology will solve any climate problems (if there is a problem). For example Carbon capture technology is already in development (google it). And above all please put down the Guardian and let go of your middle class guilt.