“lack of progress” since November 2019 as “frustrating and scary” ... hmmm, I think the lack of progress since November 1989 when Mr David Tripper called it an "issue of vital concern" has been frustrating and scary - climatenorthernireland.org/news/climate-e…
To be blunt, climate change policy can be aptly described as 30 years of relative inaction, dithering and fiddling whilst producing oodles of hot air.
X : I don't see you being active in the field?
Me : I used to be. Back in the early 90s when we had a chance to mitigate.
X : Why did you stop?
Me : It became obvious back then that we wouldn't mitigate or take serious action until the effects overwhelmed us ...
Me : I used to be. Back in the early 90s when we had a chance to mitigate.
X : Why did you stop?
Me : It became obvious back then that we wouldn't mitigate or take serious action until the effects overwhelmed us ...
.... I have many friends who have remained in the field but they moved on from trying to stop climate change to looking at ways of adapting / surviving its worst effects long ago.
X : What about technology?
Me : Ah, the belief that some magic technology will be invented that'll reverse the effects. Basically, we've been waiting for the second coming of the prophet Zarquon for 30 years. I hope they hurry up.
Me : Ah, the belief that some magic technology will be invented that'll reverse the effects. Basically, we've been waiting for the second coming of the prophet Zarquon for 30 years. I hope they hurry up.
X : Do you have anything positive to say?
Me : Yes. XR (extinction rebellion) are fabulous. A forward thinking distributed organisation that is focused on all of us. Alas, our home secretary calls them criminals but ... the criminal thing is 30 years of inaction.
Me : Yes. XR (extinction rebellion) are fabulous. A forward thinking distributed organisation that is focused on all of us. Alas, our home secretary calls them criminals but ... the criminal thing is 30 years of inaction.
X : Well, what is your suggestion then?
Me : Sarcasm? In the early 90s we knew two things mattered - energy production and consumption. We've made some progress on energy production but I see little progress on consumption. Instead we have a bit of recycling, maybe go vegan etc.
Me : Sarcasm? In the early 90s we knew two things mattered - energy production and consumption. We've made some progress on energy production but I see little progress on consumption. Instead we have a bit of recycling, maybe go vegan etc.
The problem back in the early 90s was concerns about "market" impact. We also had the ozone hole debacle which we were "solving" (Montreal protocol etc) and so people assumed that we could "solve" climate change without "damaging the market". That has been the mantra ever since.
Hence we end up with "Green economy", in order for others to see revenue and profitability in it.
The blunt truth, without a reasonably habitable environment then there is no economy, there is no market. The market yields to the environment and not the other way around.
The blunt truth, without a reasonably habitable environment then there is no economy, there is no market. The market yields to the environment and not the other way around.
X : Aren't we reducing energy consumption?
Me : There will be some but we're also offshoring it ... what do you think happens when we buy products from other nations? This is part of the problem of not having transparency on supply chains. You will not solve this until you do.
Me : There will be some but we're also offshoring it ... what do you think happens when we buy products from other nations? This is part of the problem of not having transparency on supply chains. You will not solve this until you do.
X : I don't understand why not?
Me : Greed. People will game the system until you do have transparency.
Me : Greed. People will game the system until you do have transparency.
X : Those are a bit dramatic.
Me : Really? Habitability is a transitional not a permanent state. Back in the 90s we used to point to Earth's twin - Venus - as the example. Once a planet, much like our own, which had oceans. We're messing with dramatic stuff.
X : Space?
Me : Really? Habitability is a transitional not a permanent state. Back in the 90s we used to point to Earth's twin - Venus - as the example. Once a planet, much like our own, which had oceans. We're messing with dramatic stuff.
X : Space?
Me : Oh, that old chestnut. Humans go into space. Sure, I know a lot of very wealthy financiers who think this is the answer. The question you need to ask yourself is "which humans"? It's not "all humans" into space and you're unlikely to be on the party invite.
X : But living in space ...
Me : ... are we going to have a discussion on delusion versus reality?
Me : ... are we going to have a discussion on delusion versus reality?
X : What should we do?
Me : Vote for politicians who are focused on the "collective we" over the "individual me" i.e. next time you have a chance to vote for a Corbyn (not likely in my lifetime in the UK), don't mess it up. Also, take individual action -
Me : Vote for politicians who are focused on the "collective we" over the "individual me" i.e. next time you have a chance to vote for a Corbyn (not likely in my lifetime in the UK), don't mess it up. Also, take individual action -
https://twitter.com/DavidRoweWTL/status/1420426047061962756
X : You don't like the home secretary?
Me : I have no confidence (see also the police - theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/j…) for many reasons e.g. XR as criminals, undermining our national heroes for taking the knee and supporting the death penalty - to start.
Me : I have no confidence (see also the police - theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/j…) for many reasons e.g. XR as criminals, undermining our national heroes for taking the knee and supporting the death penalty - to start.
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
