Jump to content

Climate Camp & East Dulwich

ChavWivaLawDegree

By ChavWivaLawDegree
in The Lounge

 Share

Recommended Posts

bald marauder

bald marauder

Posted
Posted

Apparently the proportion of energy represented by food miles varies from 5% to 50% depending on the product and where it's sourced from. Many other factors such as cultivation, harvesting, fertilising. packaging and transport all make up a significant part of a food product's carbon footprint.

Food and fuel are the two biggest areas of carbon impact domestically speaking, and limiting your flights can make a huge difference to your individual carbon footprint.

Obviously there are lots of 'low-hanging fruit' too such as low-energy light bulbs and avoiding plastic carrier bags, but some of these (such as the bags) do not make as much of an impact as the media would have us believe.

At the moment, in the absence of firm guidelines or legislation, it's up to our individual consciences which areas we choose to action in - or not.

I also read recently that the distress caused by airport noise to those living directly under a flight path has been given a monetary value (16 pence per flight) as part of a scientific 'well-being' study, so some high-profile law suits may now be in the offing.

monica

monica

Posted
Posted

bald marauder Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Apparently the proportion of energy represented by

> food miles varies from 5% to 50% depending on the

> product and where it's sourced from. Many other

> factors such as cultivation, harvesting,

> fertilising. packaging and transport all make up a

> significant part of a food product's carbon

> footprint.

> Food and fuel are the two biggest areas of carbon

> impact domestically speaking, and limiting your

> flights can make a huge difference to your

> individual carbon footprint.

> Obviously there are lots of 'low-hanging fruit'

> too such as low-energy light bulbs and avoiding

> plastic carrier bags, but some of these (such as

> the bags) do not make as much of an impact as the

> media would have us believe.

> At the moment, in the absence of firm guidelines

> or legislation, it's up to our individual

> consciences which areas we choose to action in -

> or not.

> I also read recently that the distress caused by

> airport noise to those living directly under a

> flight path has been given a monetary value (16

> pence per flight) as part of a scientific

> 'well-being' study, so some high-profile law suits

> may now be in the offing.

Bald Maurader

We all have a right to our opinion,but as i am someone who is trying to campaign on reducing plastic bags,i totally disagree about what you said on the media have us believe.I suggest you have a chat to the marine steward council about how many of their volunteers go out on to the coast and collect plastic bags,wrappings,containers and toxic waste that has been killing our marine life for years.I find myself utterly astonished that someone who comes across intelligent can make such a throw away remark.

bald marauder

bald marauder

Posted
Posted

Monica,

I am not pro-plastic bags, just that logically and scientifically speaking, there are other more impactful and important things we can do to protect our environment and its natural resources. For example, if one were to sign up to green energy (which I have both at home and at work) this has a huge positive effect on limiting climate change and CO2 emissions. Plastic bags do pose a threat to marine life, but probably a much smaller one in any case than that posed by over-fishing. If you want to do marine life a favour, then stick to MSC-approved sustainable stocks.

I am not in any way denigrating the completely valid and worthwhile results achieved by campaigning to reduce/prevent the use of plastic bags, however the danger is that by ruthlessly exorcising plastic bags from their lives, then some people (probably Daily Mail readers) may think that have absolved themselves of any responsibility to do anything else to reduce their impact on the world. Now, others maintain that it is important to give people an 'easy way in' (eg plastic bags) so that they can move on from tackling small things to some of the bigger ones, like energy, transport, etc. But I think it's too early to tell if this approach really works. (And judging by the percentage of people who have signed up to green energy so far it's not encouraging, it looks like we're really going to struggle to hit our 10% by 2010 target.)

So, it really wasn't intended as a throw-away comment, just a recognition that the issues are not as simplistic as the media would sometimes have us believe in their desire to sell a paper every day.

citizenED

citizenED

Posted
Posted

I am all for individuals trying to reduce their own carbon footprints - the more information we get the better able we are to act in an informed manner. However, let's be honest, people can be selfish, stupid, or plain forgetful so this is where governments need to take action. Look at it this way; if we ask people, very nicely, to turn off their electrical appliances and switch to low energy bulbs we will get some results. If governments stopped manufacturers making TVs with "stand-by" switches and banned tungstan lightbulbs, it would have a far greater effect.


citizen

AnotherPaul

AnotherPaul

Posted
Posted

Am doing lots of agreeing here. Legislate against bad manufacturing practices and in some cases take the choice away from the consumer where choice equates with wasting energy and materials. Our government is far to beholden to business and has simply got to shake that off or humanity and life on earth is over already. Come on Mr Brown!

ap

LostThePlot

LostThePlot

Posted
Posted

citizenED Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> If governments stopped manufacturers making TVs with

> "stand-by" switches and banned tungstan

> lightbulbs, it would have a far greater effect.


I hope someone can back me up on this, but from my mid teens we were all told that leaving your tv on standby is far more efficient that switching it on and off all the time.


Also, and I have yet to hear an answer to this question. How does using less electricity save the carbon footprint?. Somewhere a F*ing big Powerstation is producing electricity for my and everyone elses needs. Now, if I turn of my TV at nigfht then obviously I'm not using electricty. Likewise if the whole country does it, then there will be less need for power. HOWEVER, power stations are large buggers, and slowing the rate down for producing electricity, and then picking up up again in the morning is not a 5 minute business. So surely the electricty it is producing is "going to waste"* when it produces moe than we need.


I understand if we waste water, water can be stored, hence we have hose pipe bans, but electricty.....how do you store that then, so controling production at the source?



Eric


* or whater they call it when it is produced bu not used...

SeanMacGabhann

SeanMacGabhann

Posted
Posted

Leaving a TV on standby is less HARMFUL to the TV than switching it off and on and makes it last longer - not sure about more energy efficient


As someone who used to be on a 50p meter I have some trouble believing every stat thrown at me on standby modes. I could leave a TV on standby for 50p in 1987 and it would still have 49p left now (ish)

One full bath of hot water needed 2 50ps tho

AnotherPaul

AnotherPaul

Posted
Posted

LostThePlot, the power station energy issue is all about what gets wasted. About 2/3 of the energy created by burning coal disappears up the chimney, making it an incredibly wasteful method for producing electricity. This energy can be captured and kind of recycled but energy businesses are not prioritising that as it costs and the govt. hasn't legislated to force them. E-on, of the recent funny windy advert fame are seeking to build a massive old fashioned power station in Kent.


Mockney, that coat hanger trick caused climate change. Do it again and reverse the force, please.


ap

monica

monica

Posted
Posted

Bald marauder

Thanks for the reply.I feel that every little helps and reducing plastic bags are just a drop in the ocean.But my attitude is that every one who does their little bit from recyling to not using plastic bags will in the long run have a positive effect on the enviroment.Im a toddler of the 70s and i remember we had no plastic bags and my mum use to go shopping with her long string bag.Because we have become a culture of convenience,the plastic bag has become a common item in the supermarkets and shops,we have seen the devastation bags have caused and i do retaliate when i read throw away remarks,thanks again for your reply

bald marauder

bald marauder

Posted
Posted

Monica,

Mrs M and I have about four big, re-usable bags which we use in place of plastic as often as we can (though sadly I can't profess to be totally plastic-free yet, but we do recycle everything religiously and have a wormery - which currently needs more worms - anyone have any to spare?)

Glad that I am forgiven for my earlier comments anyway!

BM

wee quinnie

wee quinnie

Posted
Posted

ChavWivaLawDegree Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> I know all you posh East Dulwichers love nothing

> better than to jet off on exotic holidays, but

> this week there is a chance to take a break in the

> UK at very low cost.

>

> You could pop along to the Climate Camp outside

> Heathrow. It will be an interesting and

> informative break. There is a programme of talks

> and workshops, so it's not just about protesting,

> it's a chance to raise awareness and educate

> yourselves. Not even East Dulwich will be immune

> from the effects of Climate Change.

>

> The exact location is on their website

> www.climatecamp.org.uk and has been splashed all

> over the telly, so you should have no problem

> finding it.

>

> The Camp organisers have published a list of

> workshops and other events taking place throughout

> the week and full details are on the website, , at

> www.climatecamp.org.uk/wshops.pdf

>

> Look out for the infamous Chav if there are any

> pitched battles with the old bill! (Joke, I'll be

> orf mate, can't be blotting my spotless copy book

> now can I??!)


CWALD - are you back yet? How did you fare? I was down there myself on Sunday for the protest march. I must say I found it quite frightening finding myself and the group I was with surrounded my police on horseback at one point. The police seemed needlessly confrontational.

Nero

Nero

Posted
Posted
No, I don't. Some of the schemes are said to be useless, ie. planting individual trees rather than forests. Why not lag your roof instead, resolve never to use a plastic bag, get a wormery, change bulbs, buy less stuff than you usually do, use your car much less, etc. etc? Nero
wee quinnie

wee quinnie

Posted
Posted

lorraineliyanage Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Slightly off-topic...Do any of you pay to offset

> the carbon emissions from your flights? I'm

> considering doing so for my next holiday flights.


I think it was Dulwich Mum put it best when she said something along the lines of:


Paying to off set your flights is like kicking your dog and giving money to the RSPCA!!!

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
 Share
Go to topic listing

East Dulwich Forum

Established in 2006, we are an online community discussion forum for people who live, work in and visit SE22.

Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...