"This is your captain speaking .......... I'd like to welcome you aboard our low CO2 emission flight to the south of France."
The airline pilots association are claiming that the airline industry is being unfairly targeted as the worst of the contributors to climate change. Full ABTN article.
“Air travel has just been an easy target. But not any more. World air travel actually accounts for only 2% to 3% of global carbon dioxide emissions according to the International Panel on Climate Change and while air travel is proving more popular, carbon dioxide emissions will not be more than 6% by 2050 – a tiny amount compared to the big polluters.”
Isn’t it amazing just how easily human nature forces all of us to adopt an ‘it’s not us, it’s them’ type of attitude? Just one question – who is giving us the real numbers and the actual facts?
But we all may stop jetting off to the Mediterranean sun anyway if the researchers at New Scientist are correct – it will be waaaay tooooo hot for us Brits to handle! See Dangerously hot.
Back to sunny Skegness it is then.
Arms dealing - the career of the future?
Meanwhile, how to profit from Global Warming - become an arms dealer! Taken from The Observer.
'Expect huge migrations of people looking for food and shelter as they flee areas that become uninhabitable because of crop failure or flooding,' he says. 'You are already seeing this happen in places such as Bangladesh. That will force western governments to increase their military spending to keep people out.'
Now that’s how to put an optimistic slant on forthcoming geo-political disasters caused by global warming! Just to be fair though, he has hedged his bets by putting some huge investments into Green technologies too. Heads he wins, tails he wins?
He mentions Bangla Desh – the UN reckons the disastrous Darfur conflict, as well as smaller episodes in Somalia and Ivory Coast, are also a direct consequence, to some degree, of global warming, too. Sci-Tech Today story.
Monday, June 18, 2007
Vivoleum - made for the people by the people.
Ashes to ashes? Perhaps that should be Oil to Oil?
This is absolutely hilarious – it has to be one of the best stunts ever pulled on the Big Oil fraternity. See Daily Kos - Vivoleum .
It does, however, have some potentially serious undertones – they couldn’t really be thinking of making a replacement fuel out of human carcasses ……… could they?
Shades of Soylent Green ….. but this time as a fuel rather than as feedstuff?
This is absolutely hilarious – it has to be one of the best stunts ever pulled on the Big Oil fraternity. See Daily Kos - Vivoleum .
It does, however, have some potentially serious undertones – they couldn’t really be thinking of making a replacement fuel out of human carcasses ……… could they?
Shades of Soylent Green ….. but this time as a fuel rather than as feedstuff?
More or Less?
David Cameron told us today what his big idea is for government. To do much less of it: Power to the people? Hmmn. I am just interested in the numbers:
Sounds awesome! But...
Do we still have to pay for all the meddling, overseeing, assessing, policing, etc public servants and over-funded, empire-quangos that have been stuck on the roster to keep themselves occupied 'doing' government?
And if a way can be found to ditch them without too many redundancy compo claims that would render it all a fiscal disaster, do we get a refund?
Sounds awesome! But...
Do we still have to pay for all the meddling, overseeing, assessing, policing, etc public servants and over-funded, empire-quangos that have been stuck on the roster to keep themselves occupied 'doing' government?
And if a way can be found to ditch them without too many redundancy compo claims that would render it all a fiscal disaster, do we get a refund?
Council tax funds pensions!!
DAILY MAIL
So now I'm beginning to understand just why some councils are moving to fortnightly bin collections - much of their (sorry, but shouldn't that be OUR?) allocated cash goes straight into 'gold-plated', index linked pensions. .... And they can still retire at 60 whilst the plan is that the rest of us will have to work until 68!
Wasn't council tax supposed to pay for essential services? I don't remember agreeing to help provide super pensions for the faceless bureaucrats who spend all day pen-pushing and inventing new and ever more meaningless targets. But I suppose they have to employ someone to decode the data collected from the "Chip 'n Bin" devices.
So now I'm beginning to understand just why some councils are moving to fortnightly bin collections - much of their (sorry, but shouldn't that be OUR?) allocated cash goes straight into 'gold-plated', index linked pensions. .... And they can still retire at 60 whilst the plan is that the rest of us will have to work until 68!
Wasn't council tax supposed to pay for essential services? I don't remember agreeing to help provide super pensions for the faceless bureaucrats who spend all day pen-pushing and inventing new and ever more meaningless targets. But I suppose they have to employ someone to decode the data collected from the "Chip 'n Bin" devices.
Lord Above. Well, until next year.
I'm afraid I had a few thoughts about The Green Bishop?
Whilst endorsing the notion of something is better than nothing, I have to express some concern about the preponderance of those in the public eye who are publicised as 'giving up [insert eco-damaging indulgence here] for a [acceptable media-worthy personal/corporate inconvenience period here].
As we're on a theological bent, what kind of message does it send that these things can bought off by a brief period of abstinence?
That's like flying half the planet around for a climate change awareness concert about the damage of flying halfway around the planet, and making a big play about offsetting the travel... then going straight back afterwards to... oh.
Let he whose business doesn't 'require' travel cast us back into the Stone Age.
For me, in such cases, the messenger can often be as important for credibility as the message.
Whilst endorsing the notion of something is better than nothing, I have to express some concern about the preponderance of those in the public eye who are publicised as 'giving up [insert eco-damaging indulgence here] for a [acceptable media-worthy personal/corporate inconvenience period here].
As we're on a theological bent, what kind of message does it send that these things can bought off by a brief period of abstinence?
That's like flying half the planet around for a climate change awareness concert about the damage of flying halfway around the planet, and making a big play about offsetting the travel... then going straight back afterwards to... oh.
Let he whose business doesn't 'require' travel cast us back into the Stone Age.
For me, in such cases, the messenger can often be as important for credibility as the message.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)