Thread: Environment problems

Originally Posted by Wongo

Increase the cost of electricity, water and petrol. Make it hurt when people use too much. Work on the demand not the supply. Allow only 1 car per family.

Build nuclear power stations, turn off all electrical at night, stop improving living standard, ban all new re-chargeable gadgets ….

They already are doing this (additional charges) Wongo as people start to care and cut back the suppliers are putting up their costs to compensate for losses. I did a post on this some time ago.

Do it to business who are the biggest wasters. Hence Earth hour trouble is turning everything of for just 1 hr is a bigger waste as it take more juice to start and turn stuff back on Earth hr should be 4 hr min for business.

Thanks for the replies. The picture is not pretty no matter which way you look at it. Kev could have signed my dunny roll and achieved as much. There are a lot of things which could be looked at / implemented which are only for mans enjoyment that i believe would make a difference. The automobile and power generation seem to be big contributors amongst the myriads of other problems.

There is tremendous waste in every quarter which tends to contribute to a global problem. I noticed a blurb on China's Olympics and the background smog would choke a donkey. It seems as if the kangaroo's have it sorted by producing harmless gases. It is englightening to see others views. I suspect this may be another industry in the making.

Regards Mike

Originally Posted by MICKYG

Kev could have signed my dunny roll and achieved as much.

No if had only signed your dunny roll then we would not be up for the huge fines , like NZ was last year , if we don't reach these preset level cuts in emmisions
So he signes the Keyto Protocall, which gives us targets to reach in emmision reduction , why couldn't we have set and reached our own targets without the fines if we dont, the fines that you and I as tax payers will pay for and if we are fined will he take a pay cut to help pay these fines not on your nelly.
now lets see how smart he is when he words the "sorry statement", lord knows he stood up in parliment and asked jonny why he couldn't say sorry now he's in the box seat and I for one will be intrested in the wording and the outcome

Originally Posted by Ashore

No if had only signed your dunny roll then we would not be up for the huge fines , like NZ was last year , if we don't reach these preset level cuts in emmisions...

Some common sense for a change.

Rudd told everyone when he signed that we are currently "over" the carbon credit target by 1% and that equals 6 million tones of carbon, and at (current) prices of $25 per tonne its $150 million of tax payers money out the window on day one.

The members who have signed wont have to pay untill 2012 and then the price per tonne of carbon is expected to quadruple. Some experts last week estimated a possible $2.5 billion bill we will owe in 2012.

Already Japan $15 billion, Italy $15 billion and Spain $9 billoin and little ol Ireland $450 million. Its a con job and Rudd has been sucked in trying to show Aussies and the world he is up to the job.

How many Australians will lose their jobs with large industries being forced to cut emissions or face massive fines because of this. Last week the Herald Sun ran a poll and 3000 voted and 88% said we should not have signed. So much for Labor using the mandate we gave to govern for the people, and instead sign up before the Governor Generals ink had dried.

Had to laugh a few months back, watching the news on the idiot box. Newsreader with the face of concern reporting on the latest global warming figures, linked to carbon emissions etc. Then launches straight into the highlight of the night, practice day at Bathurst, complete with big grin. Images of burning rubber (and that was only the spectators), thousands of gallons of fuel being burnt in the name of entertainment, and then add the transport of getting teams there, the R&D beforehand, the spectators driving there en masse etc. No pretence of a carbon neutral event there, but the newsreader was completely oblivious to the irony!

Cheers,

I fully expect to get negative "brownie points" for my ideas as follows;

1] "allow" people to die instead of trying to save every single life on the planet. It's not as if the human species is at immediate risk of extinction. Actually, the species is at risk if we continue in our current direction.

2] abolish or severely restrict the stockmarket. It needs much more control.

Here in Thailand, there is a difficult struggle going on. It's about the "poor people". Here, the perceived "poor" people are generally farmers. The majority of them haven't used & do not currently use machines in their toil. Most still rely on the humble Buffalo, which fertilizes at it works/walks. The Buffalo is actually considered to be an esteemed member of the family & is treated accordingly. For the "rich" Thai farmers (very few) who use machinery, some have reverted back to the buffalo due to the high cost of fuel (smart people).
What do "poor" people do in their spare time? They socialise, which usually involves drinking alcohol (easy to make) & lots of singing (don't need electricity to sing). I do this all the time & I don't get bored. As a matter of fact, I'm always waiting for the next social gathering.

Slowly though, Thailand is succumbing to the "western way" of life - consumerism. Slowly the farms are being turned into housing developments or industrial estates.
The Thai government is putting up strong resistance to western ideals but unfortunately, the damage has been done & many Thais are just as money hungry as westerners. This, in turn, creates an environment of consumerism & waste...let's not forget that the lust for money drives these things.

Less than 100 years ago, Thailand was barely touched by western culture & was essentially a pollution/waste free country. People lived happily & didn't heavily rely on money or energy to fulfill their "happiness" requirement.

Sadly, many Thais see their farmers as "low class" citizens. Speaking to my Thai students one day, I asked them, "What would happen if all the Thai farmers stopped work." The looks on their faces were amazing. After a while, a brave student made a comment, "Where would we get our food?"
Me: "The supermarket".
Them: "The food there is no good." (full of preservatives & other crap).
Me: "Are farmers important?"
Them: "Yes."
Me: "Please remember...no farmers, no "good" food."

I'm not a religious man but I do firmly believe that after George W &/or his mates have instigated WW3, the meek shall truly rule the world. It will be then, if we are smart enough, when we will realise the error of our polluting, energy wasting & otherwise profiteering ways.

Originally Posted by Lignum

Already Japan $15 billion, Italy $15 billion and Spain $9 billoin and little ol Ireland $450 million. Its a con job and Rudd has been sucked in trying to show Aussies and the world he is up to the job.

He did it to apease the greens , if their preferences hadn't gone to labor then we would still have a liberal government, He didn't sign because it was good for you & me the average voter or it was good for Australia , it was a pay off to the Greens, and is it in the best intrests of Australia , well you judge when your tax dollars arn't spent on hospitals , edcuation, child care etc etc but are paid in unnecassary fines.

I agree that there is nothing wrong with reducing polution, and searching for replacements for fossil fuels that will one run out.

What I dissagree with is scaremongering by the AGW alarmist, that has governments in a panic making bad descisions to appear to do the right thing etc.

It would be a huge error to agree to any cut backs in emissions without China and India. You might ask why they too don't want to save the planet? They are smarter than us and wont be led by the masses scared out of their wits by mass hysteria.

If you choose to look at the other side of the AGW debate, that is the debate that the alarmists insist is not required as the facts are in, you will realise that the AGW fear is nothing but a hoax.

It is fast appearing as a means to redistribute wealth from developed countries to undeveloped countries through carbon credits schemes.

Any movement that has to rely on gross exaggeration to get their message accross through fear and then stifle any debate to the contrary, has got to be looked at with suspicion.

My BS radar is going off on AGW. Particularly when there is contrary scientific facts debunking many of the theories of AGW.
11 major items in the film "inconvenient truth" were proved to be either wrong or simply guesswork, leading to a court ruling in Britain saying that schools showing this film also had to show a disclaimer.

It realy bothers me that governments are prepared to waste billions of dollars where that money could and should be spent in better areas.

Spot on Rod, and if we are wrong we'll just move over to that other
planet .

Originally Posted by Rossluck

The technicians need to work harder on traffic light technology.

They should flash amber on side streets when traffic volumes are low. You could treat them as a stop/give way sign then.

Originally Posted by MICKYG

It seems as if the kangaroo's have it sorted by producing harmless gases.

We should be eating them. The country is being over run by them.
Get rid of all the methane producing cows, forget about 'land management' issues and just let the roos run wild. Then just get hunters and trappers to provide our McRooburgers.

The country is ideally suited to them, and they're delicious when marinated properly. Very tender, and it's hard to tell the difference from beef.

edit: Kangaroo farts could fight global warming

A lot of interesting points in this thread...

The very thing that bothers me is that most people seem to rely quite heavily on the government doing something about the situation through legislating etc. Whilst I believe this is definitely something that needs to happen, I'm also of the opinion that individuals (including business owners) need to do something to prove their commitment to the cause.

My partner and I had a discussion with his parents just the other night about environmental issues. Now don't get me wrong, my in-laws are good people and I love them to bits. But they don't seem to understand that almost $400 per quarter (for two people) for electricity is obscence. They live in a large house, have absolutely no energy saving bulbs and leave lights on for their ageing dog. Why not buy at least SOME green power? Our electricity bill averages around $50 per quarter, and the same goes for our gas bill. This includes $10 per quarter worth of green electricity. I feel awful about our measly $40 per annum contribution, and it is something I am trying to fix (if only I could actually get through to Origin Energy without being on hold for donkeys every time I call them).

To get back on topic, if I were in charge, I'd review Australia's car industry and immediately do something about the tax incentives given to businesses and those with business vehicles for driving unnecessarily large cars, not to mention driving lots of k's. Further to this, I would abolish all fuel subsidies and replace them with an emissions tax of 20%. I would also impose an emissions tax on new cars, based on how 'green' they are (taking into consideration production, recyclability, lifespan etc). That would get a lot of people (individuals AND business) thinking carefully the next time they buy a new car.

I would also invest heavily in cycling infrastructure. Where cycle lanes don't exist, I would not hesitate to cut into traffic lanes in order to accommodate cyclists. I would also abolish all import taxes and GST on new bicycles, as I believe there needs to be more incentive for people to get out of cars and onto bikes.

There are lots of other things I'd do as well, such as limiting logging, providing more incentives for people to 'go green' etc. but there are simply too many to list.

Am I a bitch or what?

Cheers,
Lotte

Originally Posted by LotteBum

But they don't seem to understand that almost $400 per quarter (for two people) for electricity is obscence.

That's nothing. Al Gore had a bill of US $1,359 for one month.

Of course Mr 'save the environment' himself would rather that we forget about his "Inconvenient Truth"

$400 per quarter (for two people) for electricity is obscence

I was talking to my neighbours (two adults, one toddler one baby) on the weekend. Their electricity bill for last quarter was over $1,000. They attribute it to the massive 3 phase ducted air conditioner they installed when they built the house. They use it for heating (not really required for cooling in this part of the world).

Ours is not quite that much, but it's a hell of a lot more than $50 per quarter, so I'd like to know how you manage that. Probably 1/3 of ours goes to running the on site sewerage system and the water pumps. That still leaves us with a bill around 9 to 10 times what yours is.

My parents' bill is usually around the $180 to $200 mark per quarter.

Originally Posted by LotteBum

A lot of interesting points in this thread...

if I were in charge, I'd review Australia's car industry and immediately do something about the tax incentives given to businesses and those with business vehicles for driving unnecessarily large cars, not to mention driving lots of k's. Further to this, I would abolish all fuel subsidies and replace them with an emissions tax of 20%. I would also impose an emissions tax on new cars, based on how 'green' they are (taking into consideration production, recyclability, lifespan etc). That would get a lot of people (individuals AND business) thinking carefully the next time they buy a new car.

I would also invest heavily in cycling infrastructure. Where cycle lanes don't exist, I would not hesitate to cut into traffic lanes in order to accommodate cyclists. I would also abolish all import taxes and GST on new bicycles, as I believe there needs to be more incentive for people to get out of cars and onto bikes.

There are lots of other things I'd do as well, such as limiting logging, providing more incentives for people to 'go green' etc. but there are simply too many to list.

Am I a bitch or what?

Cheers,
Lotte

No you're not a bitch but there are further considerations needed about aspects of your suggestions

lots of km's are necessary in regional australia.
A lot of business km's are unavoidable

especially those areas without alternate transport.

cycling in the country is impractical given the often signifigant distances involved

the emissions tax is totally unnecessary as the governments are reaping huge income from fuel to the extent they have are major cash surpluses.
Increase taxes, any sort, the pig trough just gets bigger

But the general thrust of yoiur arguments are sound.