English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

And given the vast amounts contributed by the States, China and India, why the hell should I be being shouted at to switch my television right off at night, and all the rest of the little bits and pieces?
I understand about the disposal of waste, and I do my bit for recycling. But why should I, an ordinary bloke living on the South Coast of England, be required to make sacrifices when massive economies, airlines and the like cause millions of times more damage than me?

2007-02-11 19:32:27 · 13 answers · asked by Anonymous in Environment

Hey Ho!
I posted this on Science & Maths in the hope that I might get some factual answers but all I get is opinions. Very interesting opinions, some of them, and some I agree with.
I wonder if it's because my basic thesis is right and no-one in possession of the facts is going to argue, just keep their heads down.
It's not true that it's all us little people causing the problem.
It is big business, the power industry, airlines and governments causing it.

2007-02-11 22:27:23 · update #1

13 answers

Perhaps you're being shouted at because it on too loud - rather than the energy loses. Try turning it down and see what happens.

Flipancy aside - it's up to you (currently), if you can't be arsed you'll pay that little bit more for the use (or the waste if this stuff on standby) energy. And in the grand scheme of things then yes, your efforts are almost insignificant, but add up all these little contributions and they do make a difference.

The growth of emerging economies is a worry and unless technology can be developed which is carbon neutral, or significantly less carbon emmissive then at present, all our efforts will be lost as these emerging economies grow and pump out increasing levels of CO2. China for example is planning on building 1 coal fired power station a week for the next 7 years. If as a nation went completely carbon neutral tomorrow, their growth would undo our efforts in just two years.

But even if we manage to get stuff under control population is set to expand and in order to simply keep emmission at there present level we will all need to use less (emit less carbon).

Your efforts do realise a cost saving to you - so it's not as though you're doing something for nothing - you'll save money by doing this stuff - so why not - standby energy loses are 10% of your total energy bill (apparantly) - that's quite a lot for not much of a return.

A final thought - is NOT using standby such a big deal - all it allows you to do is turn on or off a unit with a remote control. Is it that much extra effort to get up and switch on or off the unit rather than using the remote?

2007-02-12 01:27:40 · answer #1 · answered by Moebious 3 · 0 0

becuase unless normal people like us start doing something, the big companies will think they can get away with ignoring the problem. Anyway, not all airlines etc. are being anti-green. Virgin is offering something like 11 million to the scientists who can find a way of re-capturing the carbon-dioxide emissions of virgin planes. Bug companies are putting money into research, and some are doing something about it. But still, we have known for too long that what we are doing is harming the environment, beyond repair, and not doing anything is down right selfsih, as it is the next generations that will suffer.

2007-02-11 19:57:09 · answer #2 · answered by Kit Fang 7 · 0 0

a million. Which of those maximum ideal suits your position on international warming? (please chosen one) d. The planet is warming, and it is by and large or completely using human action 2. Which maximum ideal suits your view or opinion? between those 2 b. If the international is warming rapidly, it is possibly an fairly impartial aspect, or some thing that would have positives and negatives that type of stability one yet another out c. If the international is warming rapidly, it is possibly a nasty aspect 3. How previous are you? (in case you do not prefer to furnish specifics, please a minimum of aspect out your age to the nearest 20 years or some thing) 31 4. what's your optimal aspect of steerage? when you're nonetheless in college, how a lot practise do you need to get? If suitable, what container of steerage did you learn/are you interpreting/do you need to learn? I actually have an M.S., at the moment a second 3 hundred and sixty 5 days Ph.D. student interpreting the mind-blowing international of plant/ecosystem interactions. 5. What u . s . and state/province/different political subunit are you from? Born in Oklahoma, grew up in Florida yet have also suggested as, Georgia, Hawaii, Idaho, Oregon and Colorado "domicile' 6. How would you classify your political point of view, extensively? (as an get mutually: average Republican, liberal without get mutually association, staunch Libertarian, etc) i'm a unclean average 7. How would you classify your approximate monetary status and (if employed) interest? (as an get mutually: center-type accountant, operating-type structure worker, wealthy housewife etc.) Broke as a shaggy dog tale grad student 8. How would you classify your non secular worldview, a minimum of extensively? this is going to make the deniers moist themselves, yet technology is the nearest aspect to faith I actually have.

2016-12-04 01:57:02 · answer #3 · answered by ? 4 · 0 0

Government couldn't give a damn if the UK contributes 2% to global warming, just as long they can tax us. They would tax you for farting if they had a way.

Unless the bigger countries do something, then we're pi**ing in the wind with our efforts.

If we get told to switch TV's off standby on a night, how many traffic lights are lit up and not used?

2007-02-11 21:06:43 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's so 'ickle Tony can pretend he is a solving the world's problems so he gets a good (IE Well Paid) job when he gets chucked out.
Politicians attack individuals whilst ignoring big organisations which are really the problem. Aircraft, trucks and aircraft carting vegetables about the world, limousines - two Jags - for Ministers and so on and so on.
Those wanting US to 'do something' do not set a good example.
RoyS

2007-02-11 20:40:29 · answer #5 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

It's because people like you that do these things at night are the reason the UK contributes only 2%.

2007-02-11 19:56:21 · answer #6 · answered by Bjorn 7 · 0 0

well think of it this way...if you switch your TV off at night, think of all the electricity you'll be saving, that's money back in YOUR pocket

that's a good incentive for starters...so it's not really much of a sacrifice when you look at it in that respect...same goes for changing your lightbulbs to energy saving bulbs

but yeah, as someone else mentioned....keep doing what you're doing...a lot of us are doing the same thing, and those other countries are addressing the same issues now

2007-02-11 19:41:21 · answer #7 · answered by town_cl0wn 4 · 0 0

they're trying to start a norm. the u.s., china, india, and all are just far behind; u.k. is ahead of the game. just think of what you would think if you didnt have to make the sacrifices, then suddenly the next night you had people at your door fining you for leaving christmas lights on until sunrise, or something radical along those lines.

2007-02-11 19:39:07 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Because those massive economies are made up of hundreds of millions of ordinary Joe Bloggs like yourself that can all make a difference if they act together.

Start with yourself, and try to get others to follow.

2007-02-11 19:35:46 · answer #9 · answered by 6 · 3 0

This figure represents what the UK contributes at home. you know UK related economic activities abroad i.e India and China contribute to their high figures.

2007-02-11 19:51:04 · answer #10 · answered by gutsa 2 · 2 0

fedest.com, questions and answers