Wednesday, October 28, 2009
Global Cooling is a con
This won't be news to anyone who's been paying attention, but it needs to be shouted out and repeated often, because the American public and even the BBC are falling for the lie.
There are many quote worthy lines in this report. Almost at random, let's go with-
posted by Ian Pattinson at 9:09 AM
This won't be news to anyone who's been paying attention, but it needs to be shouted out and repeated often, because the American public and even the BBC are falling for the lie.
There are many quote worthy lines in this report. Almost at random, let's go with-
Saying there's a downward trend since 1998 is not scientifically legitimate, said David Peterson, a retired Duke University statistics professor and one of those analyzing the numbers.
Identifying a downward trend is a case of "people coming at the data with preconceived notions," said Peterson, author of the book "Why Did They Do That? An Introduction to Forensic Decision Analysis."
Labels: climate change, deniers, Global cooling
posted by Ian Pattinson at 9:09 AM
Friday, June 12, 2009
Global Warming Art
MAking climate change almost look pretty, Global Warming Art presents the data as clearly as possible.
Note I found Global Warming Art whilst researching a reply to this post. As I had comments deleted the last time I questioned the veracity of that particular graph, here's what I said-
Technorati tag: Climate Change
posted by Ian Pattinson at 11:11 AM
MAking climate change almost look pretty, Global Warming Art presents the data as clearly as possible.
Note I found Global Warming Art whilst researching a reply to this post. As I had comments deleted the last time I questioned the veracity of that particular graph, here's what I said-
Thanks for the links, but I couldn't find the graph in your post or the figures used in it. You should know that a number of the theories championed by Easterbrook have been examined and shown to be lacking.
For example- Mid century cooling- http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2006/03/what-about-mid-century-cooling.php - CO2 isn't the only thing controlling the planet's temperature, during this period the global dimming effect of particulates overwhelmed it. Various other of his arguments, such as that it's a natural cycle or all down to sun spot activity- and several other points- are addressed in articles linked to on this page- http://scienceblogs.com/illconsidered/2008/07/how_to_talk_to_a_sceptic.php
But back to the graph at the bottom of your post. I wanted to address it because it just looks wrong. Not the numbers are wrong or it's wrong because I don't agree with your position, but wrong as a graph. Look at the red trend line. Before 2005 it's steady, the wild variations of individual data points don't make it jump around. After 2005 it's following the data points almost exactly. The red line is based upon average anomalies over a given period, but it looks like the averaging was done over a far shorter period post '05 than pre. If the average reacts that drastically to a dip in the recorded anomalies then it should also have kicked sharply up for the El Nino year of 1998 and less sharply down for 1985 (La Nina) and 1993 (Pinatubo volcano).
Basically I think someone has fudged the post 2005 trendline. Or, more bluntly, I think that graph is a lie. I'd recommend checking its provenance before using it again. For graphs of temperature change created from publicly available figures you could try http://www.globalwarmingart.com/wiki/Temperature_Gallery
Technorati tag: Climate Change
Labels: climate change, deniers, graphics, graphs, map
posted by Ian Pattinson at 11:11 AM
Thursday, February 05, 2009
Some interesting links on climate change
Behemoth of the blogosphere BoingBoing has a guest blogger on board this week who has posted a collection of climate change denial posts. Cory Doctorow has come back with a bunch of posts about the science of the subject. For instance-
The Discovery of Global Warming - a history, a hyperlinked text because there were/are so many pieces of research going on concurrently and independently that an attempt at a linear history of the subject wouldn't work.
What we've learned in 2008- discoveries in the field of climate change last year.
Climate Change Economics. This looks like heavy going, but it's all about the economics around cutting green house emissions and discussion of different incentives to do so.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:36 AM
Behemoth of the blogosphere BoingBoing has a guest blogger on board this week who has posted a collection of climate change denial posts. Cory Doctorow has come back with a bunch of posts about the science of the subject. For instance-
The Discovery of Global Warming - a history, a hyperlinked text because there were/are so many pieces of research going on concurrently and independently that an attempt at a linear history of the subject wouldn't work.
What we've learned in 2008- discoveries in the field of climate change last year.
Climate Change Economics. This looks like heavy going, but it's all about the economics around cutting green house emissions and discussion of different incentives to do so.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
Labels: climate change, deniers, economics
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:36 AM
Tuesday, September 09, 2008
Let's form a climate change brain trust
Former UK chief scientist Sir David King is calling for a concerted effort to combat climate change. Especially, as it's his area of expertise, scientific work on the scale of CERN to look for alternative energies and clean up technologies.
Sir David commented that global warming was more dangerous than terrorism whilst he was chief scientist, a comment that anyone with half a brain could see was logical and nowhere near as controversial as some made it out to be. In fact, as it affects the poorer nations more, fuelling feelings of injustice and eventually leading to overcrowding and all the problems that entails, it could be said that climate change is a major factor in increasing terrorism. Fight the cause, not the symptoms.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
posted by Ian Pattinson at 11:59 AM
Former UK chief scientist Sir David King is calling for a concerted effort to combat climate change. Especially, as it's his area of expertise, scientific work on the scale of CERN to look for alternative energies and clean up technologies.
Sir David commented that global warming was more dangerous than terrorism whilst he was chief scientist, a comment that anyone with half a brain could see was logical and nowhere near as controversial as some made it out to be. In fact, as it affects the poorer nations more, fuelling feelings of injustice and eventually leading to overcrowding and all the problems that entails, it could be said that climate change is a major factor in increasing terrorism. Fight the cause, not the symptoms.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
Labels: climate change, energy policy, science
posted by Ian Pattinson at 11:59 AM
Wednesday, July 09, 2008
Advice for Gordon- save the world by bribing the voters
I don't have any particular interest in Gordon Brown staying on as Prime Minister, he's possibly worse than Blair because he's too much of a coward to actually do anything radical. If he were, however, to suddenly develop a spine and display some of the savvy he claims to have there are ways he could get re-elected, boost the economy and start taking big steps towards hitting carbon dioxide reduction targets.
All he has to do is bribe the electorate.
A small number of people choose to ignore the evidence on global warming and will shout about any environmental initiatives no matter that they often have benefits beyond the green. Let's just ignore them. Others are determined to cut their footprint no matter what. These converts deserve rewarding, and will be as a bonus of what I'm suggesting. The largest number of people, across a range of scepticism to understanding, aren't going green because of the initial expense. Also for many of them when Gordon says "Green" they hear the word "Tax".
Give these people the money to go green.
The recent announcement of a £100billion green initiative by Brown did mention solar power and other grants. What's needed is for these to be big enough to cover most of the cost of installing panels, insulation or whatever is needed, because at present the payback in reduced bills isn't enough. Most people would be better off leaving their money in the bank and earning interest. It would also help the uptake if the rates to sell electricity back to the suppliers were better. Let's say that power companies should write off one unit of power consumed for every unit generated- in summer or on a windy day the house could pay for the electricity it used when it was cloudy or still. After the bill balances then the microgenerator can still sell to the power company at, say, half the price per unit they were being charged.
As important as increasing the grants and improving buy back is selling them properly. Emphasis should be put on giving money back to the consumer and making them independent of big suppliers. Gordon's too dull to do this well, so he'd have to hope he could find a minister who could do it for him. The Tories have already figured out that this is a good sell, with proposals for feeding landfill savings back to households that recycle more. Their ideas about modifying the tax on petrol are based on a similar idea but seem half baked at best.
Of course, per kilowatt generated and ton of CO2 saved an increase in the scope and size of grants for microgeneration will be far more expensive than offshore wind or any other scheme. But no-one ever seems to think about where this money will go. The workers who install photovoltaics, groundsource pipes etc. will all be based in Britain. With a bit of encouragement the companies creating the equipment could all be British as well. They'll all pay tax on their increased income, and boost the economy with their spending, as will the households now with extra cash from the electricity they're saving and generating.
Of course the main reason a scheme like this won't go ahead is because it will do the one thing all politicians are terrified of- it will allow the electorate to become less dependent on the state and the big businesses that pay for all the lobbying.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, Opinion, Gordon Brown
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:10 AM
I don't have any particular interest in Gordon Brown staying on as Prime Minister, he's possibly worse than Blair because he's too much of a coward to actually do anything radical. If he were, however, to suddenly develop a spine and display some of the savvy he claims to have there are ways he could get re-elected, boost the economy and start taking big steps towards hitting carbon dioxide reduction targets.
All he has to do is bribe the electorate.
A small number of people choose to ignore the evidence on global warming and will shout about any environmental initiatives no matter that they often have benefits beyond the green. Let's just ignore them. Others are determined to cut their footprint no matter what. These converts deserve rewarding, and will be as a bonus of what I'm suggesting. The largest number of people, across a range of scepticism to understanding, aren't going green because of the initial expense. Also for many of them when Gordon says "Green" they hear the word "Tax".
Give these people the money to go green.
The recent announcement of a £100billion green initiative by Brown did mention solar power and other grants. What's needed is for these to be big enough to cover most of the cost of installing panels, insulation or whatever is needed, because at present the payback in reduced bills isn't enough. Most people would be better off leaving their money in the bank and earning interest. It would also help the uptake if the rates to sell electricity back to the suppliers were better. Let's say that power companies should write off one unit of power consumed for every unit generated- in summer or on a windy day the house could pay for the electricity it used when it was cloudy or still. After the bill balances then the microgenerator can still sell to the power company at, say, half the price per unit they were being charged.
As important as increasing the grants and improving buy back is selling them properly. Emphasis should be put on giving money back to the consumer and making them independent of big suppliers. Gordon's too dull to do this well, so he'd have to hope he could find a minister who could do it for him. The Tories have already figured out that this is a good sell, with proposals for feeding landfill savings back to households that recycle more. Their ideas about modifying the tax on petrol are based on a similar idea but seem half baked at best.
Of course, per kilowatt generated and ton of CO2 saved an increase in the scope and size of grants for microgeneration will be far more expensive than offshore wind or any other scheme. But no-one ever seems to think about where this money will go. The workers who install photovoltaics, groundsource pipes etc. will all be based in Britain. With a bit of encouragement the companies creating the equipment could all be British as well. They'll all pay tax on their increased income, and boost the economy with their spending, as will the households now with extra cash from the electricity they're saving and generating.
Of course the main reason a scheme like this won't go ahead is because it will do the one thing all politicians are terrified of- it will allow the electorate to become less dependent on the state and the big businesses that pay for all the lobbying.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, Opinion, Gordon Brown
Labels: carbon footprint, carbon neutral, climate change, eco-building, energy saving, Gordon Brown, Green Building, Household, MP, Opinion, politics, renewable energy, Solar Power, Zero Energy homes
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:10 AM
Thursday, June 26, 2008
Energy independence begins at home
Gordon Brown has announced a £100billion renewable energy plan. The Daily Mail and its readers have reacted as you'd expect, ignoring the boost to the economy from all the jobs created and the opportunities through grants to go energy independent.
So, those of you who can, I'd recommend stealing a jump on the whingers and using their tax money to go off grid. When I researched grants for solar panels last month I found that the existing scheme had been phased out, which was annoying. I'm now willing to give Brown the benefit of the doubt and hope this was because they were gearing up to a new and improved scheme. It isn't easy. I'm not as obnoxiously and knee-jerkingly anti Brown/New Labour as the Mail's readers, but past performance does mark the Government as untrustworthy.
The schemes for householders will be announced later this Summer. I'll be looking out for them and will try to do some number crunching on them when they arrive.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
posted by Ian Pattinson at 5:50 PM
Gordon Brown has announced a £100billion renewable energy plan. The Daily Mail and its readers have reacted as you'd expect, ignoring the boost to the economy from all the jobs created and the opportunities through grants to go energy independent.
So, those of you who can, I'd recommend stealing a jump on the whingers and using their tax money to go off grid. When I researched grants for solar panels last month I found that the existing scheme had been phased out, which was annoying. I'm now willing to give Brown the benefit of the doubt and hope this was because they were gearing up to a new and improved scheme. It isn't easy. I'm not as obnoxiously and knee-jerkingly anti Brown/New Labour as the Mail's readers, but past performance does mark the Government as untrustworthy.
The schemes for householders will be announced later this Summer. I'll be looking out for them and will try to do some number crunching on them when they arrive.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
Labels: Carbon Dioxide, carbon footprint, carbon neutral, climate change, energy saving, Gordon Brown, Infrastructure, renewable energy, Solar Power, Wind Power
posted by Ian Pattinson at 5:50 PM
Tuesday, February 05, 2008
Climate change denial can lead to poverty
Iain Martin roles out is a tired old argument that I've heard several times before. So this is as good a time as any to reply.
"but it makes no sense to send our economy, or those of developing countries, into reverse gear on the back of apocalyptic warnings by those who enjoy predicting disaster"
Really? Who is going to build the windmills? Manufacture and mount the solar panels? Build all the low energy houses? Bring existing houses up to standard? Where are they going to spend the billions that stand to be made? What are home owners going to do with the money they save by cutting down on waste?
How blinkered do you have to be to miss the huge opportunities that are available to the early adopters of energy saving technologies? You can finesse your arguments against climate change as much as you want, but you'd be an idiot if you couldn't see the advantages of switching to renewables and becoming more efficient.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
posted by Ian Pattinson at 5:43 PM
Iain Martin roles out is a tired old argument that I've heard several times before. So this is as good a time as any to reply.
"but it makes no sense to send our economy, or those of developing countries, into reverse gear on the back of apocalyptic warnings by those who enjoy predicting disaster"
Really? Who is going to build the windmills? Manufacture and mount the solar panels? Build all the low energy houses? Bring existing houses up to standard? Where are they going to spend the billions that stand to be made? What are home owners going to do with the money they save by cutting down on waste?
How blinkered do you have to be to miss the huge opportunities that are available to the early adopters of energy saving technologies? You can finesse your arguments against climate change as much as you want, but you'd be an idiot if you couldn't see the advantages of switching to renewables and becoming more efficient.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
Labels: climate change, deniers, Telegraph
posted by Ian Pattinson at 5:43 PM
Thursday, December 20, 2007
Comparative Planetology
Kim Stanley Robinson has some interesting things to say about mankinds effect on the environment and the badly thought out assumptions behind some ideas of sustainability.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:27 AM
Kim Stanley Robinson has some interesting things to say about mankinds effect on the environment and the badly thought out assumptions behind some ideas of sustainability.
It’s easy to imagine people who are bored in the modern techno-surround, as I call it, and they’re bored because they have not fully comprehended that they’re still primates, that their brains grew over a million-year period doing a certain suite of activities, and those activities are still available. Anyone can do them; they’re simple. They have to do with basic life support and basic social activities unboosted by technological means.
And there’s an addictive side to this. People try to do stupid technological replacements for natural primate actions, but it doesn’t quite give them the buzz that they hoped it would. Even though it looks quite magical, the sense of accomplishment is not there. So they do it again, hoping that the activity, like a drug, will somehow satisfy the urge that it’s supposedly meant to satisfy. But it doesn’t. So they do it more and more – and they fall down a rabbit hole, pursuing a destructive and high carbon-burn activity, when they could just go out for a walk, or plant a garden, or sit down at a table with a friend and drink some coffee and talk for an hour. All of these unboosted, straight-forward primate activities are actually intensely satisfying to the totality of the mind-body that we are.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse
Labels: Celebrity, climate change, eco-building
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:27 AM
Tuesday, May 29, 2007
Eco talk at the Hay Festival
Some of the contributors to the Guardin's Comment Is Free section are at the Hay Festival. Here are a few of their Green flavoured posts-
Is political leadership renewable?
I'm not climate change's Billy Graham
The joys of going green
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, Climate Change
posted by Ian Pattinson at 12:52 PM
Some of the contributors to the Guardin's Comment Is Free section are at the Hay Festival. Here are a few of their Green flavoured posts-
Is political leadership renewable?
The challenge facing David Miliband is clear - to realise the potential of renewable energy. Today's question at Hay: does he have the courage to do it?
I'm not climate change's Billy Graham
Climate change denial, I discovered at the Hay festival, shares the same characteristics as religion.
The joys of going green
Dick Strawbridge's talk at Hay was enough to make the most jaded nip out for a low-energy lightbulb.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, Climate Change
Labels: climate change, politics
posted by Ian Pattinson at 12:52 PM
Friday, May 18, 2007
C40
The C40Large Cities Climate Summit was held in New York this week, with mayors of major cities from around the world vowing to do their bit to cut greenhouse gas emissions. This is looking increasingly like a problem that's going to be tackled first at a personal and local level before national governments are going to pay any attention.
Technorati tag: Climate Change, New York
posted by Ian Pattinson at 1:36 PM
The C40Large Cities Climate Summit was held in New York this week, with mayors of major cities from around the world vowing to do their bit to cut greenhouse gas emissions. This is looking increasingly like a problem that's going to be tackled first at a personal and local level before national governments are going to pay any attention.
Technorati tag: Climate Change, New York
Labels: climate change, New York
posted by Ian Pattinson at 1:36 PM
Tuesday, May 01, 2007
Manchester Campaign Against Climate Change Carnival
Greater Manchester Campaign Against Climate Change will be holding a carnival on Saturday 30th June in the Peace GArdens near St. Peter's Square. You can download a pdf of the flier to print out and distribute.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, Climate Change
posted by Ian Pattinson at 5:31 PM
Greater Manchester Campaign Against Climate Change will be holding a carnival on Saturday 30th June in the Peace GArdens near St. Peter's Square. You can download a pdf of the flier to print out and distribute.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, Climate Change
Labels: Campaign, climate change, Manchester
posted by Ian Pattinson at 5:31 PM
Monday, March 05, 2007
The Green capital
The capital will reduce its carbon emmissions by 60% within 20 years if Ken Livingstone's plans work out.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, London
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:39 PM
The capital will reduce its carbon emmissions by 60% within 20 years if Ken Livingstone's plans work out.
Technorati tag: EcoHouse, London
Labels: carbon footprint, climate change, London
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:39 PM
The denial business is still going strong
I think the title says it all "All those Scientists may still be wrong". All those thousands of intelligent, highly educated people, experts in their fields, who have spent billions of hours examining the data, testing theories and extrapolating alternatives might, just possibly, not be absolutely 100% correct in their predictions. So we should do nothing and hope they're not right.
The question should be, what's so wrong with reducing carbon dioxide output? What's being called for is an increase in efficiency and a reduction in reliance on limited resources. It's a winning combination for everyone and a great way to alleviate poverty. Even without global warming this should be the aim of every person on the planet. Or do the deniers not want to see poorer people leapfrog ahead of them into the future?
Technorati tag: Climate Change
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:09 PM
I think the title says it all "All those Scientists may still be wrong". All those thousands of intelligent, highly educated people, experts in their fields, who have spent billions of hours examining the data, testing theories and extrapolating alternatives might, just possibly, not be absolutely 100% correct in their predictions. So we should do nothing and hope they're not right.
The question should be, what's so wrong with reducing carbon dioxide output? What's being called for is an increase in efficiency and a reduction in reliance on limited resources. It's a winning combination for everyone and a great way to alleviate poverty. Even without global warming this should be the aim of every person on the planet. Or do the deniers not want to see poorer people leapfrog ahead of them into the future?
Technorati tag: Climate Change
Labels: climate change, deniers
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:09 PM
Monday, February 26, 2007
Climate Challenge
Can you balance the budget, keep the electorate happy and fed and reduce greenhouse gas emmissions? Try the BBC's Climate Challenge.
Technorati tag: Climate
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:09 PM
Can you balance the budget, keep the electorate happy and fed and reduce greenhouse gas emmissions? Try the BBC's Climate Challenge.
Technorati tag: Climate
Labels: BBC, climate change, simulation
posted by Ian Pattinson at 10:09 PM
Monday, February 19, 2007
The 2010 Imperative
posted by Ian Pattinson at 11:34 PM
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/brian_wilson/2007/02/building_a_green_future.html
http://www.2010imperative.org/
The Global Emergency Teach In, next Tuesday. Share ideas and plans for reducing the eco-impact of the built environment.
Labels: climate change, eco-building
posted by Ian Pattinson at 11:34 PM
Sacrifice What?
I've noticed the word "sacrifice", or variations on it, popping up in discussions of global warming recently. The deniers and nay-sayers gleefully tell us that "ordinary people" won't be able or willing to make the sacrifices- ie lifestyle changes- necessary to cut carbon dioxide output. I believe they are insulting the very people they pretend to champion, under estimating what the average citizen is capable of.
Sadly, too many Greens have taken up this idea and talk of the troubles we face. All talk of sacrifice suggests we'll have to go back to the Dark Ages to cut consumption.
It's all nonsense, of course. What's needed is a fresh look at just what we'd be giving up and a more honest description of it. So let's make a few sacrifices. Let's sacrifice-
Paying too much for bland, boring food that's over packaged and shipped halfway around the world. Research has shown that local shops and markets are consistently cheaper than the supermarket chains. They're also friendlier, put more money into the local economy and stock foods you won't find on Tesco's shelves.
Burning money running a status symbol that increasingly says bad things about you, that is a danger to everyone on the road- including its occupants- and spends most of its life carting nothing more substantial than air. If people took the time to find the largest car they needed, rather than the ideal vehicle for a trek across Alaska with the extended family, they could save hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds a year without sacrificing any of the convenience and comfort of having a car. Of course, it would be best if they could leave the car behind more often as well, but maybe they'd learn that when they realised how little they really needed it.
Teaching children to be unhealthy and dependent on others. They could walk to school, getting exercise, building self confidence and teaching them to do stuff for themselves. It would probably make them safer in other ways as well. Recognising, and being recognised in, their neighbourhood should help children spot trouble such as the mythical danger stranger if it ever appeared.
Paying exorbitant energy bills because our filament bulbs use more energy making heat than they do making light. Really, when a decent compact fluorescent bulb will pay for itself in less than a year, why do people insist on the false economy of filament bulbs?
That's just a sample. Next time someone tells you the culture won't change because of the sacrifices involved try one of them as a reply. We're all in a position to make sacrifices which actually leave us better off as well as helping the environment. When we've pocketed the money from them, more drastic action will be less painful and easier to contemplate.
posted by Ian Pattinson at 7:59 PM
I've noticed the word "sacrifice", or variations on it, popping up in discussions of global warming recently. The deniers and nay-sayers gleefully tell us that "ordinary people" won't be able or willing to make the sacrifices- ie lifestyle changes- necessary to cut carbon dioxide output. I believe they are insulting the very people they pretend to champion, under estimating what the average citizen is capable of.
Sadly, too many Greens have taken up this idea and talk of the troubles we face. All talk of sacrifice suggests we'll have to go back to the Dark Ages to cut consumption.
It's all nonsense, of course. What's needed is a fresh look at just what we'd be giving up and a more honest description of it. So let's make a few sacrifices. Let's sacrifice-
Paying too much for bland, boring food that's over packaged and shipped halfway around the world. Research has shown that local shops and markets are consistently cheaper than the supermarket chains. They're also friendlier, put more money into the local economy and stock foods you won't find on Tesco's shelves.
Burning money running a status symbol that increasingly says bad things about you, that is a danger to everyone on the road- including its occupants- and spends most of its life carting nothing more substantial than air. If people took the time to find the largest car they needed, rather than the ideal vehicle for a trek across Alaska with the extended family, they could save hundreds, if not thousands, of pounds a year without sacrificing any of the convenience and comfort of having a car. Of course, it would be best if they could leave the car behind more often as well, but maybe they'd learn that when they realised how little they really needed it.
Teaching children to be unhealthy and dependent on others. They could walk to school, getting exercise, building self confidence and teaching them to do stuff for themselves. It would probably make them safer in other ways as well. Recognising, and being recognised in, their neighbourhood should help children spot trouble such as the mythical danger stranger if it ever appeared.
Paying exorbitant energy bills because our filament bulbs use more energy making heat than they do making light. Really, when a decent compact fluorescent bulb will pay for itself in less than a year, why do people insist on the false economy of filament bulbs?
That's just a sample. Next time someone tells you the culture won't change because of the sacrifices involved try one of them as a reply. We're all in a position to make sacrifices which actually leave us better off as well as helping the environment. When we've pocketed the money from them, more drastic action will be less painful and easier to contemplate.
Labels: climate change
posted by Ian Pattinson at 7:59 PM
