International UK/European energy crisis, is Russia behind this?

[HeffDoesWant]

It doesn't matter AOC says the world will end in like 10 years anyways unless we do drastic things... Time to switch your dog diets, hard hitting journalism helping you peasants.

That's actually quite interesting.

I've heard of cockroach farming to use as feedstock in aquaculture but this seems like a reasonable step.

 

[HeffDoesWant]

You really don't know? Because big oil is in the politicians pockets. Same reason we're going to electric cars kicking and screaming, home solar energy is too expensive for most. Government cares more about corporations than it does people, been like that for a long time.

I disagree.

Big oil doesn't really compete with nuclear and is of lesser value than gas and coal to most western nations.

 

[moreorless87]

That's actually quite interesting.

I've heard of cockroach farming to use as feedstock in aquaculture but this seems like a reasonable step.

Really though I think there has long been a deliberate tactic with enviromentalism to try and push it towards low level consumer responsability.

The idea we can collectively save the planet via recycling, buying certain products or shifting lifestyles, these things do have some potential to help of course but I think they have been used to try and shift focus away from changes needed at a big business level, both by taking up all the space in what media time environmentalism gets and in trying to guilt trip the public, "hey now, don't be critical of Shell when we all know you didnt recyle that can properly last week".

 

[Hellowhosthat]

My point still stands. Whether the UK becomes carbon net zero or not is NEGLIGIBLE.

Not really, if any nation can demonstrate that they can become carbon zero and still run well then it sets a positive example to everyone else. The answer isn't just to throw our hands in the air and say "well China have a lot of emissions so fuck it"

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

They will be forcing us to eat bugs soon, too. The BBC are already priming the pumps:

Can eating bugs save the world?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/p01599yk

Eating insects: Should we be eating more? Why are they so good?
www.bbc.co.uk/newsround/49127499.amp

A neglected protein-rich 'superfood'
https://www.bbc.com/future/article/20210420-the-protein-rich-superfood-most-europeans-wont-eat

But, don’t worry, I’m sure Bill Gates, AOC and the Met Gala type people will still be eating beef.

Honestly I think it's an ingineous idea. It's a super food and costs nothing to produce and does not pollute. Meat production cannot sustainably quench the hunger of population growing in all shitholes of the world and demanding more steaks.

 

[Goonerview]

Not really, if any nation can demonstrate that they can become carbon zero and still run well then it sets a positive example to everyone else. The answer isn't just to throw our hands in the air and say "well China have a lot of emissions so fuck it"

Boris Johnson: Hey China! We are carbon zero! Don’t you wanna join us? We’re all in this together! Right? Huh?

China:

You and a few posters on here have a very naive world-view.

 

[Goonerview]

Honestly I think it's an ingineous idea. It's a super food and costs nothing to produce and does not pollute. Meat production cannot sustainably quench the hunger of population growing in all shitholes of the world and demanding more steaks.

Post your receipts! Why don’t you start eating bugs and be the change you want to see in the world.

 

[Hellowhosthat]

Boris Johnson: Hey China! We are carbon zero! Don’t you wanna join us? We’re all in this together! Right? Huh?

China:

You and a few posters on here have a very naive world-view.

So what's your solution?

 

[Letssnuggle]

It has a bad press with reactor failures. We are building a nuclear plant in the UK which will be online in 2026 but the price of energy there will be expensive, twice as expensive as wind farms.
I think the future is fusion reactors but we are some way away from that technology, 2050 at the earliest. Fusion has a massive advantage that it can't meltdown and releases no harmful radiation if things go wrong.

IMO you're right when you say Russia is the direct cause related to Europes nat gas price woes. But I don't think this is some nefarious plan.

Winter is coming and it gets extremely cold in Russia. They need natural gas too. I believe they're simply filling their own caverns so they can have supply for their own country.

When the world opened back up after lockdowns - demand for nat gas surged. However, numerous situations limited supply. The freeze in Texas, historically lower amount of offshore oil rigs, frackers limiting oil production in fear of over supplying the market, etc.

Long story short, there has been and will continue to be, a massive global push toward natural gas. And supply simply needs to increase. There's not a nefarious Russian plan. And Europe is way to dependent upon Russian natural gas.

 

[Goonerview]

So what's your solution?

You need to stop thinking in terms of absolute “solutions”. There is a cost and benefit to everything we do. There is no “solution”, there are costs and benefits.

Moreover, we are already being more efficient. If it were not for mass immigration, the population of the UK (and much of Europe BTW) would be declining naturally. Our fertility rates have been below 2.1 for decades (since the 1970s, I believe).

Now, the population of the UK (a high carbon per capita country) is almost 70m, it would probably be closer to 50m if it were not for mass immigration. We need to control migration and let the population decline naturally. With a smaller population there will be fewer emissions.

Countries like China are also peaking in population and will start declining soon. As will India. Fertility rates are dropping all over the world and eventually, the population of the planet will naturally level off and start declining. All without infringing on anyone’s rights.

What I suggest, is do our best to keep our countries clean, safe from crime, well-educated, pleasant places to raise families and live in peace.

Let the population naturally drop to a manageable level and when this happens, CO2 emissions should follow suit. We have to let go of this idea that we have to panic and “somebody do something!!!!”, “Ban ALL cows!!”, “Ban ALL transport!!!”.

You will probably end up causing much more harm than good.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Really though I think there has long been a deliberate tactic with enviromentalism to try and push it towards low level consumer responsability.

The idea we can collectively save the planet via recycling, buying certain products or shifting lifestyles, these things do have some potential to help of course but I think they have been used to try and shift focus away from changes needed at a big business level, both by taking up all the space in what media time environmentalism gets and in trying to guilt trip the public, "hey now, don't be critical of Shell when we all know you didnt recyle that can properly last week".

Astute observation, yes. I read an article a while ago that in the USA, recycling was the target of a major campaign by huge corporations, and that they suceeded in passing along the burden to private people, thereby saving incredible sums.

 

[Letssnuggle]

You really don't know? Because big oil is in the politicians pockets. Same reason we're going to electric cars kicking and screaming, home solar energy is too expensive for most. Government cares more about corporations than it does people, been like that for a long time.

Yea, the push for electric cars is simply a ruse for more mass transit in evermore populated cities. Electric vehicles are unrealistic with current battery technology. They are also environmentally unfriendly due to lithium strip mining.

The electric vehicle push makes absolutely zero sense until you think about what the alternative would be for ordinary people. And that alternative will be mass transit.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

Post your receipts! Why don’t you start eating bugs and be the change you want to see in the world.

No no, I am in favour of tackling climate change, but I am not one of those annoying ass activists.
All I am saying is that the idea makes sense.

But you know, whether you like it or not, there is a major shift in attitudes occuring. Mentalities are changing and the climate deniers / all the people in the USA that just DGAF are going to be increasingly isolated.

I long for a socially conservative party with a strong stance in favour of tackling climate change heads on. The only problem is that this topic has become so polarised, that it is impossible to be a climate change activist these days without being friends with the woke / antifa / BLM / open borders hyperventilating assholes.

 

[Goonerview]

No no, I am in favour of tackling climate change, but I am not one of those annoying ass activists.
All I am saying is that the idea makes sense.

But you know, whether you like it or not, there is a major shift in attitudes occuring. Mentalities are changing and the climate deniers / all the people in the USA that just DGAF are going to be increasingly isolated.

I long for a socially conservative party with a strong stance in favour of tackling climate change heads on. The only problem is that this topic has become so polarised, that it is impossible to be a climate change activist these days without being friends with the woke / antifa / BLM / open borders hyperventilating assholes.

If you truly cared about the climate, then you would want to restrict immigration.

The USA and UK are high carbon per capita countries. The higher our populations are, the more carbon emissions there will be.

Both the USA and the UK have had been replacement rate fertility for decades now and without mass immigration, would have naturally declining populations just like Japan and Italy have now.

Despite this, most climate activists are also open border advocates …. It doesn’t make sense!

 

[Hellowhosthat]

You need to stop thinking in terms of absolute “solutions”. There is a cost and benefit to everything we do. There is no “solution”, there are costs and benefits.

Moreover, we are already being more efficient. If it were not for mass immigration, the population of the UK (and much of Europe BTW) would be declining naturally. Our fertility rates have been below 2.1 for decades (since the 1970s, I believe).

Now, the population of the UK (a high carbon per capita country) is almost 70m, it would probably be closer to 50m if it were not for mass immigration. We need to control migration and let the population decline naturally. With a smaller population there will be fewer emissions.

Countries like China are also peaking in population and will start declining soon. As will India. Fertility rates are dropping all over the world and eventually, the population of the planet will naturally level off and start declining. All without infringing on anyone’s rights.

What I suggest, is do our best to keep our countries clean, safe from crime, well-educated, pleasant places to raise families and live in peace.

Let the population naturally drop to a manageable level and when this happens, CO2 emissions should follow suit. We have to let go of this idea that we have to panic and “somebody do something!!!!”, “Ban ALL cows!!”, “Ban ALL transport!!!”.

You will probably end up causing much more harm than good.

We have 50 years of gas supply left dude, something has to change.

 

[Goonerview]

No no, I am in favour of tackling climate change, but I am not one of those annoying ass activists.
All I am saying is that the idea makes sense.

But you know, whether you like it or not, there is a major shift in attitudes occuring. Mentalities are changing and the climate deniers / all the people in the USA that just DGAF are going to be increasingly isolated.

I long for a socially conservative party with a strong stance in favour of tackling climate change heads on. The only problem is that this topic has become so polarised, that it is impossible to be a climate change activist these days without being friends with the woke / antifa / BLM / open borders hyperventilating assholes.

I consider myself a conservative and I do care about the climate. I just acknowledge that there is not a lot we can do about it. And, some of the radical proposals such as banning beef or banning transport is crazy and unnecessary.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

If you truly cared about the climate, then you would want to restrict immigration.

The USA and UK are high carbon per capita countries. The higher our populations are, the more carbon emissions there will be.

Both the USA and the UK have had been replacement rate fertility for decades now and without mass immigration, would have naturally declining populations just like Japan and Italy have now.

Despite this, most climate activists are also open border advocates …. It doesn’t make sense!

I am against open borders and mass immigration. The worst is the centre-left marks in Yurrp that are in favour of open-borders AND an increase in wages. Fucking tools don't see the correlation between scarcity of labor and high wages.

The problem with neoliberal politics is that policy is driven by one axiom: GDP growth. And the easiest way to achieve that is to increase population growth. There are other ways, but they require political choices that are not quite mainstream....

 

[Goonerview]

We have 50 years of gas supply left dude, something has to change.

Well, then, the price of gas will go up. This will force alternatives.

I’m sure that there will be alternatives that will emerge when it gets closer to that point.

There will never be “zero gas”. Gas will just get to the point where it is more expensive than it is worth.

 

[KBE6EKCTAH_CCP]

I consider myself a conservative and I do care about the climate. I just acknowledge that there is not a lot we can do about it. And, some of the radical proposals such as banning beef or banning transport is crazy and unnecessary.

How can you say that there is not a lot we can do about it, lol!
If we stop producing instanteneously, our carbon footprint drops to almost zero almost, almost immediately. How can you say that there is nothing we can do? We can do everything. Not saying we should but we can.

 

[Goonerview]

How can you say that there is not a lot we can do about it, lol!
If we stop producing instanteneously, our carbon footprint drops to almost zero almost, almost immediately. How can you say that there is nothing we can do? We can do everything. Not saying we should but we can.

I did not say “nothing”, I said not a lot. Sure there is always something we can do, but unless China also completely changes (which I highly doubt), then it will be negligible.