The Climate Emergency | Page 2 | Vital Football

The Climate Emergency

Insulate Britain now blocking the roads to ports of Dover.. would the reasonable action now be see how the M25 protests went, instead of opening themselves up to more abuse from joe public, especially with the current situation.

On a side note, Prince Harry, getting chauffeured around NY in a Range Rover, after preaching about climate change is laughable.
 
Last edited:
EastvilleIMP said:
Has anyone seen the interview of the leader of the M25 protests, who doesn’t have his home insulated himself - absolute clown.
Click to expand...
I find it curious that the right is using this to bash him; as the Government putting their hands in their pockets to subsidise insulation for those that cannot afford it is what the protest is about.
 
impede said:
I find it curious that the right is using this to bash him; as the Government putting their hands in their pockets to subsidise insulation for those that cannot afford it is what the protest is about.
Click to expand...

Yeah, agree. I didn’t realise he was social housing at the time of posting.
 
Extinction Rebellion founder admits he would block ambulance carrying dying patient - Mirror Online

Classy Roger, very classy. Good job it's only a left wing nut job spouting this as opposed to anybody else other than a left wing nut job, or we wouldn't see anything else on the news or in the papers for weeks.

Good heavens, imagine the shitfest if somebody like Farage said he would block a dinghy from landing, even if it meant a migrant dying.

Talk about the nastiness and hypocrisy of extremists, well you have it right there .

Any of you SJW's out there want to comment on these views from a leader of XR.
 
hulloutpost said:
Extinction Rebellion founder admits he would block ambulance carrying dying patient - Mirror Online

Classy Roger, very classy. Good job it's only a left wing nut job spouting this as opposed to anybody else other than a left wing nut job, or we wouldn't see anything else on the news or in the papers for weeks.

Good heavens, imagine the shitfest if somebody like Farage said he would block a dinghy from landing, even if it meant a migrant dying.

Talk about the nastiness and hypocrisy of extremists, well you have it right there .

Any of you SJW's out there want to comment on these views from a leader of XR.
Click to expand...
It is absolutely pointless discussing this with somebody who denies the absolutely overwhelming scientific consensus that there is a climate crisis.
 
An idea I had the other night (my brain sometimes works), given the very small uptake on electric vehicles and most likely due to their high cost, how about all electricity used to charge them is made absolutely free? (And I'd include hydrogen fuel in this too).
Then cover the cost by upping the duty on fossil fuels (petrol & diesel).
Initially the extra duty would be minimal but as electric vehicle usage increases, the extra duty would get more & more bit by bit.
And thus the financial incentive to go green will keep increasing. And further the high cost of electric vehicles (or hydrogen pnes should that take off more) will start coming down as more and more are sold.
I'd throw in a one off grant too to purchase a green vehicle (think there used to be one but got ditched by this anti-green government).
 
Next idea, insist on all new buildings to have rooves covered in solar panels along with all east & south facing upper storey walls, as far as can be practically done.
This should have been brought in a long time ago.
Also, as with green vehicles, the cost of solar panels would fall massively once many many thousands are being installed.
 
And next idea.
Heating/hot water boilers.
Obviously millions of gas and oil ones out there. These need to be replaced over time by electric ones.
This is a costly thing to do for homeowners/tenants.
So again this warrants goverment grants to cover it.
A programme of grants to replace the oldest ones first and then keep doing it over a number of years.

And meantime insist on all new ones to be electric.
 
And similar scheme (and could be done in tandem with boilers), replace all gas cookers and gas fires with electric.
 
Planes. Aim to convert all to hydrogen fuel. Should be doable in time.

Trains. Either fully electrify all lines or maybe a cheaper solution (for countries with little electrification - us !) go for hydrogen powered trains.
 
impede said:
It is absolutely pointless discussing this with somebody who denies the absolutely overwhelming scientific consensus that there is a climate crisis.
Click to expand...
Show me where I said I don't believe there is global warming. Unfortunately for you that won't be possible as what I've said is I don't know who to trust on the extent of the problem.

Now back on point and having addressed your mistake/lie; having tried to deflect and side step the question I put out, do you out of interest have an opinion on Roger and his extremist view about letting someone die in the back of an ambulance?
 
Last edited:
Big programme of building insulation for all properties not up to best possible insulation.

Make home working the norm whenever possible, or hybrid working as appropriate. All saves on energy usage and makes for a better life too.
 
hulloutpost said:
Show me where I said I don't believe there is global warming. Unfortunately for you that won't be possible as all I've said is I don't know who to trust on the extent of the problem.

Now, having tried to deflect and side step the question I put out, do you out of interest take a view on Roger and his extremist view about letting someone die in the back of an ambulance?
Click to expand...
When you said you do not know who to trust when 95% of climate scientists all say there is and the 5% who work for petrochemical companies have all been proven recently to have been knowingly lying. If you do not accept proven facts then what else are you but a denier. Cars hold up far more ambulances than a few isolated once in a while protesters. I don't see you railing against that. Climate change will literally kill millions of people on this planet; I do not see you railing against that. You pick and choose little bits of evidence that suit your ideological agenda and ignore everything that counters it. You are like Raab and Patel cherry picking extreme examples to rob everybody of their rights. Tories are scum and people who support then knowing that are scum too.
 
impede said:
When you said you do not know who to trust when 95% of climate scientists all say there is and the 5% who work for petrochemical companies have all been proven recently to have been knowingly lying. If you do not accept proven facts then what else are you but a denier. Cars hold up far more ambulances than a few isolated once in a while protesters. I don't see you railing against that. Climate change will literally kill millions of people on this planet; I do not see you railing against that. You pick and choose little bits of evidence that suit your ideological agenda and ignore everything that counters it. You are like Raab and Patel cherry picking extreme examples to rob everybody of their rights. Tories are scum and people who support then knowing that are scum too.
Click to expand...
Nice rant, but where did I actually say I'm a denier of global warming? Another poor attempt at deflection. Do you actually have an opinion about Roger's view though?
 
Food consumption...
Certainly adds to carbon usage.
And throughout modern society, too much consumption is increasingly the norm (myself a good (ie bad) example).

Now we've already had a very mimimal and utterly token gesture of a bit of "sugar tax" on fizzy drinks. These are highly overpriced anyway that no actual retail price difference exists between full sugar drinks and the "zero" ones.
It's also pretty pointless just to pick one type of item out of thousands.

So...how about a calorie added tax (CAT)?
Simply a tax added to all food and drink according to the calories they contain.
 
HoofGrantBrown said:
Food consumption...
Certainly adds to carbon usage.
And throughout modern society, too much consumption is increasingly the norm (myself a good (ie bad) example).

Now we've already had a very mimimal and utterly token gesture of a bit of "sugar tax" on fizzy drinks. These are highly overpriced anyway that no actual retail price difference exists between full sugar drinks and the "zero" ones.
It's also pretty pointless just to pick one type of item out of thousands.

So...how about a calorie added tax (CAT)?
Simply a tax added to all food and drink according to the calories they contain.
Click to expand...
First thing I would say on that:
"Man Tax"!!!

Generally, the recommended daily calorie intake is 2,000 calories a day for women and 2,500 for men.

But that's not taking in to account other factors:

Calories are a measure of how much energy food or drink contains. The amount of energy you need will depend on:

  • your age – for example, growing children and teenagers may need more energy
  • your lifestyle – for example, how active you are
  • your size – your height and weight can affect how quickly you use energy
Other factors can also affect how much energy you burn. For example:

  • some hormones (chemicals produced by the body) – such as thyroid hormones
  • some medicines – such as glucocorticoids, a type of steroid used to treat inflammation
  • being unwell
 
Hank the Imp said:
First thing I would say on that:
"Man Tax"!!!

Generally, the recommended daily calorie intake is 2,000 calories a day for women and 2,500 for men.

But that's not taking in to account other factors:

Calories are a measure of how much energy food or drink contains. The amount of energy you need will depend on:

  • your age – for example, growing children and teenagers may need more energy
  • your lifestyle – for example, how active you are
  • your size – your height and weight can affect how quickly you use energy
Other factors can also affect how much energy you burn. For example:

  • some hormones (chemicals produced by the body) – such as thyroid hormones
  • some medicines – such as glucocorticoids, a type of steroid used to treat inflammation
  • being unwell
Click to expand...


Yes all valid points.
But if you think about it, those differences will already exist as food is generally subject to VAT. Unless someone manages only to consume zero VAT rated items, then men in general will be paying 25% more VAT on their food than women (and so on for the various things you raised).
Fair? No.
Male/female wages fair? No.

(My own wages fair? 100% nooooo!!!)
 
HoofGrantBrown said:
And next idea.
Heating/hot water boilers.
Obviously millions of gas and oil ones out there. These need to be replaced over time by electric ones.
This is a costly thing to do for homeowners/tenants.
So again this warrants goverment grants to cover it.
A programme of grants to replace the oldest ones first and then keep doing it over a number of years.

And meantime insist on all new ones to be electric.
Click to expand...

Practically all your posts argue for electrification, and I don't think one can argue with that point, provided, of course, that it is produced using non polluting sources ie/eg wind, wave, solar, nuclear

What I find ironic is that having spent most of my life opposing the generation of nuclear power - due to leaving a legacy of stored waste for future generations - I now find myself supporting it as one of the main options we need to use
 
You must log in or register to reply here.