Wednesday 24 April 2019

Greenies of the world unite!

It is so hard to care at all about the climate change protests and the well meaning Tarquins/Greta's behind them.

Dancing around on Yoga mats is one thing, but today has also see John McDonnell decide to helpfully incite the anti-capitalist movement too. We can look forward to him as Chancellor ordering our highest tax-paying companies to be 'occupied' and 'hounded.' A real through the looking glass moment.

Equally, I find the usual Press denunciations of the Greenies to be as feeble, or even worse than the strange claims they make.

"You came by plane, hypocrite!"
"Your from a wealthy background so you can afford morals"

These ad hominem attacks just add more heat, so to speak to the situation. They prove nothing other that the accuser has no real counter arguments.

What is better is to consider what the Greenies say, for example, a better argument is to tell them what really matters is China which is hugely increasing its emissions. To which the answer comes back 'well we sent them all our factories, so that is our fault too.'

Well, for me, here is the crown of thorns. Of course the West did not 'send' their manufacturing to the East. No, the East merrily came and grabbed it. They were able to do so, because labour was much cheaper and there were fewer regulations for companies to abide by - so their costs were 10x less originally than the West which had invented the Industrial revolution. Moreover, from an energy perspective, the East could happily burn all the coal and oil it liked. They don't care about using highly polluting fuel oil  in powerstations for example and Russia was happy to export - and still is to this day. So as well low regs, cheap labour they also have cheap energy costs.

With this, the economies of the East rapidly industrialised and started taking Western market share, whilst still growing the overall market. So, morally, the West did not export anything. The West in some ways is a victim of the growth of China - our sclerotic economies are signs of this.

It also means that as much as we hate the talking shops of Paris etc, really the only way to fight climate change is globally and internationally - but the focus needs to be on recalcitrant nations who refuse to play by the new rules required, whereas the Greenies as ever are focused on the evil's of Western Empire and Capitalism. Which is a shame, as in the long-term there is no mileage in this and if their worst fears come true they will have spent their energies in exactly the wrong place!


DJK said...

The arguments are the same as in CND days. To the question "Why don't you also campaign for disarmament in the USSR" CND said we had to lead by example. The greenies say exactly the same when asked why they don't protest in China.

dearieme said...

"the West which had invented the Industrial revolution" Actually, it was a bit more specific than that.

"the only way to fight climate change": oh, go on with you. It's a scam.

Anonymous said...

There is a nearby country, Germany, which is not reducing its emission, while Britain is.

Why are these characters not disrupting Berlin? I think the whole thing is just a party: they are all having a lot of fun with their pink boat and other pranks.

If they really wanted to reduce CO2 emissions (which we probably should be doing), they would all be at college studying nuclear and chemical engineering. But that's too much like hard work.

Don Cox

Raedwald said...

The UK government have helpfully made life very easy for the construction industry. Under the official methodology for 'counting' carbon, it is the nation that produces steel (2 tonnes of co2 per tonne of steel) and Portland cement (1.3 tonnes CO2 per tonne of OPC)that takes the CO2 hit, not the consumer nation - so if a new British buildng uses steel made in China and cement made in Greece, it adds virtually nothing to the UK's carbon use total. So imports also make us virtuous.

In fact, BREEAM and CEEQUAL, the two construction 'energy efficiency' ratings systems, only include energy cost in use, and not embedded energy (and its carbon cost). I know - I'm a CEEQUAL assessor.

Thus Michael Bloomberg is able to claim his new London building as the 'greenest evah' despite it having cost, er, 250,000 tonnes of CO2 to construct. A pittance, I know, compared to a coal fired power station, but still a crooked cooking of the realite.

There's a shed load of virtue signalling about, and the naive kiddies, labradors and home counties ladies on the streets are parhaps slightly less guilty than those of us who know better.

CityUnslicker said...

Raedwald, well made points indeed. It is easy to get sniffy about he protest and the Green movement, when we know that Government and Corporate 'greenwash' is a PR masterclass.

Speaking of which, one political party soon will likely twig that a promise to ban single use plastics but some scarily soon but electorally comfortably distant point - like say 2030, will be a huge vote winner.

Bill Quango MP said...

Climate change debate is only a one way street. That heads in the 'we must do more,' direction. From everyone who is ever asked.

The facile debate, such as it isn't, neverseeks to ask what the consequences of what the Greenies latest utopian dreamcather powered economy would be.

Monbiot is as wedded to ending capitalism in exchange for micro parliamnets, as he is to everyone mulching all their old clothes.

Mr Drew pointed out that one of the big drivers of energy use is video games.
Mobile phones didn't exist in any significant number before 1994. Now, in the west, everyone from the age of tweleve, has one or more of them. And probably a laptop too. And a tablet. And a tv on demand box. Sky set. A plug in cleaning device. A patio pressure washer. a coffee machine. Tassimo. Microwave.
And a whole extra range of other items that are not permanent use. Shavers. Groomers. Juicer. Bread maker. Mixer. Mini mixer. DVD. Xbox. PS4. ..and on and on.

Family energy use must have risen dramatically since the 1990s. Must have.

Go back to the 1970s, there is a kettle, hoover, lawnmower.Hairdryer. That's it.
Domestic energy consumption must have soared.

In 1982, in my school, there was a single computer. None of the accounts were on any kind of disc. No teacher had a computer. Or a phone.

We drive the demand. And the children should be informed that they are big users. And its not only "tax the banks" as a solution.

Anonymous said...

In the 1950s, a middle class family would have traditional coal/wood/coke fires, electric heaters, gas water heater. No central heating. No dishwasher, washing machine, or fridge. A radio but no TV. No car. No double glazing.

The "many" today are living in unbelievable luxury. This is I think the result of 70 years of peace, in spite of all that governments could do.

On the other hand, the Dan Dare stories in the "Eagle" predicted holidays on Mars by the 1990s. Disappointing lack of progress there.

Don Cox

Nick Drew said...

@ Domestic energy consumption must have soared

Actually ... NO !!!

UK energy demand peaked in 2005, falling ever since. Residential demand steadily falling too - until we go in for electric space heating (vs gas) & EVs in a big way. Reason is tech advance + better insulation. Seriously! Today's appliances use a fraction of older ones, more than offsetting the large increase in numbers and types of appliance

Incidentally, the utilities NEVER saw this coming - they ALL projected 2% residential electricity demand growth in perpetuity. (In 2015, Andrea Leadsom - then Energy minister - wrote a ministerial piece that began with "the need to meet the UK's ever-growing energy demand". OK, she didn't write it herself, but every one of (a) her SPADs (b) her civil servants and (c) her ignorant self allowed it to go through to publication

hovis said...

Funny I'm sure we've had this discussion before .. if it gets measured it gets "managed" - just a shame CO2 isn't what "Greens" should be focused on.

Seems to be lots of self righteous tacit support for the Extinction Rebellion nonsense from TPTB

Btw one odd little nugget I came across was the growth in consumption of power by data centres is massive and continues apace. Already dwarfs UK electricity consumption, so there should be no Twittering, Facebooking,Snapchatting, online gaming, bitcoin mining, porn or Tindering for the young ER activists.

I know weird little Greta what-her-face is primed by others, movements led by children don't have a good track record do they?

E-K said...

The agenda is communism, not greenism. Greta Thunberg and Gina Miller are human shields for what looks like a putsch to me.

E-K said...

The 'hypocrite' argument should be an end-of but isn't. And that's the problem with leftism. The killer punch is denied therefore they are going to win and I don't buy that Tarquin or Greta are 'well meaning'.

Their whole motivation is a hatred of oiks. Their beatific smirks, as they demand absolutist austerity that they themselves will never have to endure.