Great, Only 96% Of The 4% To Go Then......

[ToraToraTora]

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-48122911
Focus on China/US you wallies, UK makes no difference, derr!

[jno]

"UK makes no difference" - Brussels couldn't have put it better.

The UK is insignificant when you want it to be.

[spathiphyllum]

"UK makes no difference, derr!"

Yes it does. We need to lead the way of environmental change. To just sit back, cross our legs and blame others is not going to get us anywhere.

[spathiphyllum]

We share the world, the fact our human concepts have segregated countries and appointed different governments and style of government doesn't change the fact that we share an atmosphere and we need to work together to protect it.

[ToraToraTora]

well looks like the VBQ are getting desperate, well done jno for taking it out of context.

[spathiphyllum]

very bad quality?

[Spicerack]

It gets better than that, TTT.
Co2 makes up .04% of the atmosphere.
Mankind is responsible for 3% of Co2 production.
The UK 4% of that 3%.
Even Diane Abbot could tell you that's a small amount.

They have records going back hundreds of thousands of years. There is no correlation between Co2 and Temperature.
The planet has endured Co2 levels 10x today's levels.

If you really want to reduce Co2, step on an ant. They produce 10 times more Co2 than humans.

[david small]

Spicy, ants have feelings too.

[ToraToraTora]

the biggest producer by a mile is the oceans, part of the long carbon cycle.

[ToraToraTora]

and what about all those cows jam tarting?

[ToraToraTora]

then there's "son of krakatoa" - been continuously erupting since 1883 - climate change is continuously occurring but I don't buy this focus on one element of which we have only 4% control of.

[david small]

Shameless advertisement. I’m thinking of selling large corks for cows bottoms 3T. Fitting service not provided.

[jim360]

It's a load of nonsense that there is no correlation between CO2 and temperature. It isn't linear, for sure -- but then, what is, in such a complicated system?

Nor is it even remotely relevant that human emissions of C)2 are smaller than natural emissions -- a criticism that has been addressed, time and again. If people here were less selective in their choice of when to listen to scientists and when not to, they'd have realised that long ago.

[New Judge]

From the BBC article (listing what the pompously named "Climate Control Committee" said "we can all do" to reduce carbon emissions):

"...convert natural gas boilers to hydrogen ones."

Er...where does the hydrogen come from?

"...Setting the water temperature in their heating systems to no higher than 55C"

Er...er...from Health and Safety Guidance on the prevention of Legionnaires' Disease:

-----------
"Water contaminated with the Legionella bacteria can spread Legionnaires’ disease to people who come into contact with it. This infection is a serious, and sometimes fatal pneumonia. To stop Legionnaires disease, we can kill the Legionella bacteria. One of the most common ways to control the risk is through managing water temperatures. Through temperature control, we can prevent Legionella bacteria growth within water systems. Specifically, avoiding danger temperatures. These are temperatures that allow the bacteria to multiply and thrive. To kill Legionella bacteria, you need to make sure that the water is too hot for them to live. You don't need to boil them, but you do need to get them above 60°C."
-----------

I once worked in an office where there was an outbreak of Legionnaires' Disease. Fortunately nobody was made seriously ill but an investigation found that "Facilities" management had contributed to the problem by ruling that water should not be heated above 45 degrees C. They said they had done this for "Health & Safety" reasons (to prevent people being scalded) but everybody knew it was simply to save money. We got used to washing our hands in tepid water (not being trusted to run a little cold at the same time) but it nearly cost the company more than a few bob on their leccy bill.

This whole industry is riddled with misinformation and just plain stupidity. Meanwhile we have a government Minister giving audience to a 16 year old schoolgirl and a 14 year old schoolboy both of whom, apparently, are not satisfied that the government will meet their demands. You really couldn't make it up.

[ludwig]

Vichy British Quislings

[ToraToraTora]

jim: "Nor is it even remotely relevant that human emissions of C)2 are smaller than natural emissions " - well it sort of is jim, I mean humans have control of only 4% of the CO2, the 96% must be relevant.

[New Judge]

I think we may have done this once or twice before. Cue the analogy of the bathtub being filled by Mother Nature and Wicked Mankind topping it up with its 4% so that it overflows. It's the 4%, apparently, that causes the floor to be flooded.

[ToraToraTora]

I do struggle with these explanations as to why 4% outweighs 96%. Even if mankind contributed nothing, the bath would still overflow at times. That is natural planetary cycles of climate.

[New Judge]

Don't baffle me with logic and facts! :-)

[spathiphyllum]

Jim u give me mad relief.

[spathiphyllum]

All we need to do is look at the rapid deterioration of our climate just after the industrial revolution to see how mankind impacts the atmosphere. It aint just about CO2, temperature and greenhouse gasses.