Prepping and climate change

[Deeps]

That idea of rationing of resources has been suggested before now in the form of TEQ's or tradable energy quotas . So each person would be allowed a certain amount of energy and have to make the best use of it as they could. If for example we were all al!owed 100gallons of petrol a year we could fuel a gas guzzler and drive a short distance or turn to a smaller more efficient vehicle and dri e for further.
I'd like to see it too , less travelling means less congestion , roads will last longer and less new roads would need constructing. And perhaps extend it to things like sugar to help combat the obesity problem and reduce pressures on the health services . It really would be a win win situation.
However, after the government said they were bringing forward the ban of sales of ICE cars social media had several threads about that and the majority of comments were negative , not enough generating capacity , not enough range from EV's , battery recycling , not the charging infrastructure and so on. Basically as jansman was saying people are thinking of how it will impact them personally . It's simply the fear of mitigation.
On the positive side this corona virus has resulted in less air travel and a drop in trade from china .

Its not gonna happen for a number of reasons, the main one being we're all selfish B'stards. It would take a massive 'hearts and minds' campaign to get most of us turkey's to vote for Christmas and that's what it would be for those of us in The West who like to do what we want. Even if we did, our kids would probably vote to change it back.

As for cutting out sugar etc to help the NHS, personally, that's a bit too Nanny State for me, why not just put us all on rations and ban anything that's bad and we can all live to a hundred with a cabbage for a brain but a healthy body. If you flip that on its head and the Government encourage us to eat crap, smoke and drink too much then we'll die younger and the state will save a fortune on pensions as well as not as many drooling oldies costing the NHS a fortune.

[grenfell]

I suppose the biggest problem is that it would be political suicde for any party to bring it in.

[grenfell]

As for cutting out sugar etc to help the NHS, personally, that's a bit too Nanny State for me, why not just put us all on rations and ban anything that's bad and we can all live to a hundred with a cabbage for a brain but a healthy body. If you flip that on its head and the Government encourage us to eat crap, smoke and drink too much then we'll die younger and the state will save a fortune on pensions as well as not as many drooling oldies costing the NHS a fortune.

You jest there but i've seen that very point put over as a serious point. Old sick people are expensive to keep but if we all pay our taxes uptil the point we keel over ...
With regards to the ration thing there is certainly evidence to suggest that the nations health was better when we had it during the war but we seem to be hardwired now toward over consumption. The cynic in me also tends to think the big pharmaceutical concerns don't want a healthy population , have to think about the shareholders.

[Deeps]

You jest there but i've seen that very point put over as a serious point. Old sick people are expensive to keep but if we all pay our taxes uptil the point we keel over ...
With regards to the ration thing there is certainly evidence to suggest that the nations health was better when we had it during the war but we seem to be hardwired now toward over consumption. The cynic in me also tends to think the big pharmaceutical concerns don't want a healthy population , have to think about the shareholders.

Aye, when the nation was on rations it was the healthiest its been although even when we were growing up there weren't nearly as many chubsters, especially chubster kids. We've really ramped up on it in the last 20 years or so and I'm no different, my days of hiding behind lamp posts is a distant memory.

We behave like if we do all the 'good stuff' that we'll be immortal, if I die 10 years earlier than I 'could' have, then that's on me. There's a whiff of 'if it saves one life....' about some of this. If I die earlier then I'm 'supposed to' and become a 'bad stat' so what. There seems to be a mentality of not being a burden on the NHS, while I've no wish to be, the NHS is there to take care of us, there's an element of the tail wagging the dog here. I know the NHS is under huge pressure at the moment but its what we pay for, if the NHS wasn't there we'd be paying for private health insurance (some do anyway), in theory we'd pay less tax but we'd pay for our health needs via other means. Going wayyyyy off piste now. Apologies.

[diamond lil]

Might not work though grenfell. People who live miles out from work are bound to need more petrol to get there, and can't use bicycles etc. Going to a shop up here costs petrol, so does the doctor or the dentist, and we get school taxis to fetch the kids from the house and take them to where they get the minibus to school. Things are complicated

[grenfell]

Granted things are very complicated and it's the reason i reckon very little will actually be done . There's always going to be a proportion of the population that will suffer or see a drop in standards. I've seen that on discussions on facebook , people who travel a lot or people with trailers or people with onstreet parking and supposedly no way of charging an EV all going to be affected so better to just keep things as they are. Plus of course there's all those people who say it's just an exercise in raising money. Very often the same people are moaning about congestion and potholes yet don't want to see less vehicles on the road. What i see much less is an acceptance that oil is finite , conventional oil has already peaked and the "new" resources have a lower EROEI and the cost in monetary terms is only going to rise .
As it is , or as i see it the only real thing that is going to help the climate is an economic downturn and a big one at that and that's going to hurt a lot more people than giving up a few cars.

[Deeps]

Granted things are very complicated and it's the reason i reckon very little will actually be done . There's always going to be a proportion of the population that will suffer or see a drop in standards. I've seen that on discussions on facebook , people who travel a lot or people with trailers or people with onstreet parking and supposedly no way of charging an EV all going to be affected so better to just keep things as they are. Plus of course there's all those people who say it's just an exercise in raising money. Very often the same people are moaning about congestion and potholes yet don't want to see less vehicles on the road. What i see much less is an acceptance that oil is finite , conventional oil has already peaked and the "new" resources have a lower EROEI and the cost in monetary terms is only going to rise .
As it is , or as i see it the only real thing that is going to help the climate is an economic downturn and a big one at that and that's going to hurt a lot more people than giving up a few cars.

Can't argue with your logic there mate, again, the fly in the ointment is us and our selfishness. I think everyone outside the Oval Office accepts that there's a problem and something needs to be done, its just as long as it doesn't affect ME too much.

Had a similar conversation up at a bothy a few months back and there were 3 different groups of us, we all accepted that it was terrible what was happening etc (I broke ranks on how wonderful Greta was) but we'd all come from different parts of Scotland travelling hundreds of miles to go and climb some hills. We're all part of the problem, even when we think we're lovely and caring etc.

[diamond lil]

As somebody else said recently, the only way we're going to make a huge impact is die off in millions and the survivors re-live the Middle Ages. So I won't hold my breath waiting for volunteers

[Deeps]

As somebody else said recently, the only way we're going to make a huge impact is die off in millions and the survivors re-live the Middle Ages. So I won't hold my breath waiting for volunteers

Population control could be an option, a 'tax on kids' of some sort but again, we tend to resent anything like that. Then there's the 'numbers game', if you have more people it can give you a bigger army......

[Arzosah]

Oh, this is cheery! Sadly, however, it seems pretty accurate Very few people will give up their lifestyle to lessen human-caused climate change when 95% of the human race is charging ahead in terms of consumption. And our lifestyles are set up now so that travel is integral to the jobs so many of us do: not even just commuting or deliveries, but sales, and management inspections, and the conferences that all sorts of white collar jobs *have* to attend, in order to keep their jobs.

The only thing that *might* make a difference is google etc committing to carbon neutral by 2030 or whenever it is - they're the market leaders, and if they genuinely do that, the second tier corporations will probably follow. That might be the only chance we've got, slim as it is.