10:10

[RoosterMcLooster]

Who's signed up?

[RoosterMcLooster]

Why not?

[Peckhamgatecrasher]

What are you on about?

[Huguenot]

The commitment to cut personal carbon emissions by 10% in 2010.

Cue the wallys who say "I don't need to because I'm not the one who's poisoning the world, it's everyone else..."

[RoosterMcLooster]

Delia Smith (who cooks with an aga, has 2 foreign hols a year, flies to every norwich away match and drives a jaguar) complains that it is difficult to cut your personal emissions as there is very little information available about the alternatives. I suspect that everyone on this forum would find it very easy to reduce their energy consumption by 10%. Have a look on the Guardian website for details!

[zephyr]

I don't need to because I'm not the one who's poisoning the world, its everyone else...

Sorry, couldn't resist.

I got an email from EON yesterday about it. I can look at my 'Energy Tracker' online apparently. I put new draught excluders in and started turning off unnecessary lights last year and it appears to have made quite a difference (don't have to pay ?289 per month anymore).

Certainly will do it as it will save me money as well as 'doing my bit'

[????]

Stop flying on holiday. Sorted.

[Jeremy]

Quite right. Next year I shall be travelling to Hong Kong by canoe.

[silverfox]

I've just taken up RoosterMcLooster's suggestion above and looked at the Guardian website. I clicked on two articles and after scanning about 2,000 words on the subject I'm no clearer what I'm supposed to do to reduce my carbon footprint in a meaningful way.

Can anybody point me in the right direction so I can view a serious scientific list of the power used by everyday machines and labour saving devices. For example, if I am one of 300 people who fly on a plane to Italy and back for my holidays, hire a car and tour 1,000 miles what is the carbon breakdown of my actions as opposed to actions I take every day?

As I write this my washing machine is on, my dishwasher is on, my laptop is plugged in, my mobile phone is being charged, the light in the room is on, I've boiled the electric kettle to make a drink, taken milk from the fridge, taken some food out of the freezer to defrost overnight for tomorrow's dinner which I shall cook in an oven and newsnight is on telly. My wife is in the other room watching a different telly and my son is up stairs on another plugged in laptop with the telly also on. I'm sure this is not an unusual state of affairs in countless households up and down the country at this very moment.

If I washed up the dishes by hand I've no doubt that would help but I'm not going to start washing clothes by hand like my grandmothers used to do. I could switch off my telly as there's two others being used at the moment. I could switch off my computer. My son won't be very pleased if I ask him to do the same to reduce his carbon footprint.

The point I'm trying to make is we've reached (in the affluent first world at least) a standard of living with all sorts of gadgets and white/brown goods that will not go away. Furthermore, many of the recommendations to reduce carbon emissions are expensive, eg, lagging attics, and people won't spend the money without financial incentives. If people turn down the central heating by one degree it will help I admit but does charging a mobile phone/using a computer cancel out the gain?

[????]

Actually, reading the Guardian, turning your lights off once a year, planting a tree every so often and saying you care about it seems to be enough for 99% of people who 'say' this is an important issue - a classic liberal lite approach..take the 'correct' stance, do sod all about it.

[PeckhamRose]

Dishwashers apparently save energy: they only use the right amount of water and so if you fill up the dishwasher each time before use, even taking into account the energy used, you'll save something, money or energy, water definitely. However, no room in our flat for a dishwasher and we couldn't afford one anyway.

Washing machines probably the same theory - better than washing each and every item separately.

I remember reading that if you go in to a room which has say a strip light and turn it on each time you go in, during a day, you would save energy by keeping it on because the energy it uses being turned on each time is more than if you had left it on. But that may be bollo&s.

Do Macs use energy more efficiently than PCs? Then the world should demand the desctruction of all PCs!

I have a brick in the toilet cistern so it uses less water when flushing; can't afford a new modern cistern.

Doing me best but sometimes I look out at the view of London and all the lights especially in the taller buildings, and think - I can't do this all alone, corporate social responsibility and all that. Piccadilly at night anyone? Pahhh

[zephyr]

I do not think the campaign is aimed at taking people back to the dark ages, just being a bit more sensible.

Mind you, after agreat holiday to Bulgaria this year (first time we have flown as a family) I did suggest that we drive there next year. Didn't go down very well as its a 3500 mile round trip in the car!

Switching off unnecessary lights or other appliances, fitting draught excluders, not wasting food etc are whats recommended.

10:10

[Sue Gillie]

A propos of silverfox's post - an important one - try reading Sustainable Energy without the Hot Air by Prof David McKay. It's a lightly written (though lots of figures) down to earth assessment of what really matters and what is practicable in teh way of alternative energy and savings, rather than the emotional statements and responses we too often get. Too many "facts" are trotted out in teh papers and on air which are unsubstantiated at best, and often based on different assumptions.

I wasn't there to sign up last week, but I've dusted my bike down, turn off more lights and put machines off inseat of on standby when we're out and at night. We have also installed solar water heating (not cheap but there are grants) which at this time of year is very effective.

[silverfox]

Thanks Sue I'll give Prof McKay a go. There does seem to be a lot of hot air around regarding climate change and carbon emissions.

I am still mystified what these companies do that trade carbon emissions on behalf of big industry. Perhaps I'm naive but accepting ?x million from the likes of Mr Murdoch so that so many hectares of land can be planted with trees to offset NewsCorp's carbon footprint seems a waste of time while the Amazon and several African jungles are being decimated.

[Robyn0312]

Deforrestation of the Amazon, whilst still at too high a rate has been brought down significantly when comparing the number of destroyed hectares from this year and last year. The surrounding coutnries have formed an alliance to increase and improve patrolling and policing of the area.

One of the easiest things that you can do as an energy consumer is to look at what form of power station your energy provider relies on. Some offer certain %'s of energy from renewable sources. In supporting these more ethically minded companies you will also be helping them to fund research into newer and more efficient technologies. Realistically people do not want to have to change their current lifestyle to reduce emissions as they do not see a direct knock-on affect to themselves as an individual. However, regardless of the climate change issue we do need to switch to more renewable or alternative energy sources as we hit peak oil several years ago, we already import over 10% of our annual gas requirements and within the next 50 year they estimate that this will increase to 90%. Which also then puts us in the grip of those who supply the gas.

[kojak]

The Urban Green Fair

Sunday 20th September

Brockwell Park

http://www.eastdulwichforum.co.uk/forum/read.php?6,340509

http://www.urbangreenfair.org

[silverfox]

I suppose I should go to this and keep and open mind. However a cursory look at the urbangreenfair.org website shows pictures of lots bicycles to illustrate the sustainable transport zone, talks of solar cooking demonstrations amid pictures of lovely bread and talk of a farmer's market, the products of which I doubt will have been cooked by or cookable by such a method and also promotes the solar cinema which will show five or six films presumably not powered by solar energy.

[star13uk]

At the slight risk of a shoeing... I can't help thinking it matters not. Whatever we do will make no difference at all. Convince China, India, Brazil etc are looking out on missing the great Western lifestyle and I might change my mind. Anybody remember the "Club of Rome" from the sixties I think? Or Jerry Pournelles "A Step Further Out" ? Our future of remaining on this island earth is a very limited one - population growth, pollution, lack of renewable resources, etc....

There are answers to all these issues but until the problem gets serious enough, nothing will be done about it in any meaningful way. Governments acting globally are the only way we may solve most of the big issues - but until becomes critical they only care about the short term and their re-election prospects.

[louisiana]

In the last year I have installed an efficient combi-condensing boiler (replacing a clapped out one), renovated over a dozen big window frames to remove gaps etc., and installed draught-proofing throughout, among other things. These are all things everyone can do. What with changing all bulbs, and switching off everything I don't need to have on, I think I've achieved around 30% energy use reduction around the house. I also installed a water meter, which has cut my water and sewerage bills by more than 50%.

Some friends have just incorporated a heat pump system, but that's only really feasible for new build (which theirs is).

Many of the carbon footprint calculators online do not seem to include many of life's activities. e.g. shopping for stuff (and all the energy embodied in all that stuff).

[Huguenot]

star13uk - I can't quite make up my mind as to whether you're using that as an excuse not to do anything, or just venting.

If you were using it as a lame excuse to do nothing, then you would deserve a shoeing - althoug it would be a bit counter-prductive as you can't kick someone out of apathy, you can only dig them a grave.

If you're just venting then I'd observe that it might feel good, but it's not really very helpful - just like telling your partner you've cheated on them: it may feel like you're assuaging your guilt but really you're just selfishly upsetting people, and if you really cared you'd be better off doing something about it in silence.

[mockney piers]

" just like telling your partner you've cheated on them: it may feel like you're assuaging your guilt but really you're just selfishly upsetting people"

brilliant!!

[James Barber]

Hi RoosterMcLooster,

You asked who's signed up.

I have and have had an energy audit of my home and gradually implimenting the recommendations.

Southwark Council have signed up corporately.

Now seeing if we can sign up for 11:11 and go a big step further.

Reducing CO2 the first 10% is easy. It then gets harder and harder BUT to avoid climate catastrophe we need to reduce CO" emissions by 80% by 2050. Living in London which will mostly be submerged if sea levels do rise by 11m we all have strong selfish motives to get our acts together.

[HAL9000]

JBARBER Wrote:

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

> to avoid climate catastrophe we need to reduce

> CO[2] emissions by 80% by 2050. Living in London

> which will mostly be submerged if sea levels do

> rise by 11m we all have strong selfish motives

> to get our acts together.

1. What do you say to scientists who argue that atmospheric CO2 heats up the planet cumulatively during its relatively long lifetime and that therefore nothing we do now can avert an inevitable catastrophe in the future?

2. How is an 80% reduction to be achieved without venting as much waste heat into the atmosphere from the alternative energy sources as that which the eliminated fossil fuels would have generated in the first place? Or are you suggesting that London should revert to a pre-industrial era city by 2050?

3. An 11m rise in sea level within the lifetime of anyone on this forum would herald an extinction-scale catastrophe (i.e. runaway warming via an as yet unquantified, positive feedback mechanism). Is this the official LibDem position?

[Huguenot]

"How is an 80% reduction to be achieved without venting as much waste heat into the atmosphere from the alternative energy sources as that which the eliminated fossil fuels would have generated in the first place?"

That's one I've never heard before. Who's got the data on that one?

Fossil fuels introduce energy stored in one form (chemical energy) into a system otherwise at a dynamic equilibrium - the climate. It does this through both the release of it's own stored resources, and the increased atmospheric retention of energy from secondary sources (sunlight) through chemical insulation (CO2). The impact of the latter significantly outweighs the former.

Renewables such as wind and wave recirculate energy already in the climate system, producing no net change there, and do not contribute to increased atmospheric energy retention through insulation.

If there's data that suggests otherwise I'd be happy to consider it!

On the 11m issue, I'm glad to see that the Lib Dems care not only for ourselves, but our children etc. ;-)

[HAL9000]

Huguenot Wrote:

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

> If there's data that suggests otherwise I'd be

> happy to consider it!

You are right about the impact of renewable energy sources. However, warming caused by CO2 accumulation is not the only theory around. The theory proposed in this paper, for example, claims a better fit to the data: Thermal pollution causes global warming