[News] Just Stop Oil

[chickens]

I’m changing to just ordinary olive oil from Virgin olive oil. Once I found out Richard Branson was behind all that.

He’s got his fingers in everything. I don’t care if it’s strained through his beard to create its unique velvety texture, it’s still just hairy oil.

 

[Questions]

He’s got his fingers in everything. I don’t care if it’s strained through his beard to create its unique velvety texture, it’s still just hairy oil.

It’s all made on his private island and who knows what he puts in it.

 

[nicko31]

I assume he meant Vince funding Labour?

No he didn't mean that, he meant to deliberately mislead.

Whether you agree with Vince or not he's fully transparent. I actually think the right wing press's meltdown over his funding of JSO has helped him promote his green message. He actually prefers right wing platforms, writes a column in the Express, appears on Hartley Brewer etc..

 

[jonny.rainbow]

I dont agree with their cause, i dont agree that oil should remain in the ground.
There are too many products made from oil that at the moment have no alternative.
Im all for reducing our reliance on oil where possible but certainly dont agree it should remain in the ground. Oil will always be needed for something..........until it runs out of course

So if we need it so badly for so many products why not preserve its use for that rather than burning it up for fuel when there are many other sources of energy such as nuclear, solar, wind and water that could be used instead?

 

[The Clamp]

It’s a myth that we couldn’t survive without fossil fuel.
We did so a couple of hundred years ago and we could revert back quickly.

The sole reason we don’t is that some very rich, very influential people would lose a lot of money.

If we want to survive as a species we are going to need to revert to a much simpler, much less materialistic way of life. We will have to at some point so we may as well do it while we still have a choice how it’s done.

 

[Harry Wilson's tackle]

Having tut-tutted at people squatting on motorways and throwing paint about.... I suspect I'm among an increasing number of people who are pleased that climate change has been dragged into the spotlight.

There, I said it.

 

[chickens]

It’s a myth that we couldn’t survive without fossil fuel.
We did so a couple of hundred years ago and we could revert back quickly.

The sole reason we don’t is that some very rich, very influential people would lose a lot of money.

If we want to survive as a species we are going to need to revert to a much simpler, much less materialistic way of life. We will have to at some point so we may as well do it while we still have a choice how it’s done.

While I agree with you to an extent, I don’t think that’s how it’s going to happen. The poor will do without first, then the middle classes, then the rich. The tide is going to slowly go out and expose more and more of us. As a tipping point of public annoyance is reached, more and more resource will be poured into finding workable alternative solutions to quell public dissatisfaction.

At the same time, I believe that human ingenuity will be able to reclaim land and prevent the very worst doomsday scenarios from transpiring, but again these will turn into the kind of deals where the profit is private but the risk will be borne by taxpayers should something expensive go wrong.

It’s all conjecture, it might not pan out like that, but for my twopennorth, short of asteroid strike or nuclear annihilation, that’s what the future holds.

Honestly, I feel governments fear nothing more than their population sitting around with time on its hands.

A huge proportion of the world’s resources are poured into keeping us busy and distracted, whether that be through deliberately underpaying labour or leisure products/activities. Sadly, the future does not hold robot butlers making us martinis as we sit by the pool.

 

[portlock seagull]

World records hottest day for third time in a week

One group of scientists reported a third global high calculated with satellites and computer models.

www.bbc.co.uk

 

[The Clamp]

I am encouraged that when JSO started the only voices that were heard were those of outraged gammons who were incandescent that their day had been mildly disrupted by ghastly, unemployed, troglodytes who were only doing their cause harm.

But now more people are starting to pipe up in support of this diverse, wide range of people who see that emergency tactics are needed to get the fat cat corporate profiteers to change their ways.

There isn’t time for gentle persuasion and 30 year climate goals that will be reneged on ten years down the line.

We need legislation, enforcement and a very rapid realisation that we need to act NOW.

 

[beorhthelm]

So if we need it so badly for so many products why not preserve its use for that rather than burning it up for fuel when there are many other sources of energy such as nuclear, solar, wind and water that could be used instead?

absolutly, not enough promotion of nuclear as obvious solution to fossil fuels.

 

[Questions]

It’s a myth that we couldn’t survive without fossil fuel.
We did so a couple of hundred years ago and we could revert back quickly.

The sole reason we don’t is that some very rich, very influential people would lose a lot of money.

If we want to survive as a species we are going to need to revert to a much simpler, much less materialistic way of life. We will have to at some point so we may as well do it while we still have a choice how it’s done.

I’m not that bothered if we survive as a species or not…. I suspect we will get it together but not until the very last minute . I’m probably very selfish with my attitude though.

 

[portlock seagull]

I’m not that bothered if we survive as a species or not…. I suspect we will get it together but not until the very last minute . I’m probably very selfish with my attitude though.

You’d like to think so, however the getting it together bit is already past tense so there’s no stopping it now. We simply have to live with the consequences of damage so far; and the even greater damage / disasters to come.

Is it Beer time yet?

 

[portlock seagull]

absolutly, not enough promotion of nuclear as obvious solution to fossil fuels.

Not with the risks, and time to build and scarcity of locations. We need and there are better solutions.

 

[heathgate]

If it weren't oil, it'd be violence against women. If it weren't violence against women it'd be a race issue. If not that, then cost of living.

These people are professional campaigners/complainers who will be at every single rally for every single "issue", as long as they get to shout loudly, chain themselves to something or smash something up.

"Protestors" like this are to liberal thinking what PPF is to football fans. Any chance to cause a nuisance and be the centre of attention.

Though interesting, when their stated modus operandi is to raise awareness, that they didn't 'interrupt' proceedings at the largest of recent global events.... Glasto.....

 

[nicko31]

absolutly, not enough promotion of nuclear as obvious solution to fossil fuels.

NUC's are the mostly expensive form of new energy and have a nasty legacy to leave for our kids and grandkids to deal with. Hinkley Point C cost goes up and go, the French might make a few quid out of it. New ones take decades to build and get the carbon cost back, we're out of time.

As for SMR's they are for the birds

 

[chickens]

Though interesting, when their stated modus operandi is to raise awareness, that they didn't 'interrupt' proceedings at the largest of recent global events.... Glasto.....

Who’d notice?

 

[pb21]

absolutly, not enough promotion of nuclear as obvious solution to fossil fuels.

I am hopeful that SMRs can be a feasible/viable option sooner than they were originally thought to be, still a good few years off though...

 

[pb21]

As for SMR's they are for the birds

Why do you say this?

 

[beorhthelm]

NUC's are the mostly expensive form of new energy and have a nasty legacy to leave for our kids and grandkids to deal with. Hinkley Point C cost goes up and go, the French might make a few quid out of it. New ones take decades to build and get the carbon cost back, we're out of time.

As for SMR's they are for the birds

why? they are reimplementing existing tech on board subs and aircraft carriers. there's methods to handle, reprocess the waste.

if we are going to dismiss a known technology so easily, how else do we hope to leave behind oil and other fossil fuels?

 

[nicko31]

why? they are reimplementing existing tech on board subs and aircraft carriers. there's methods to handle, reprocess the waste.

if we are going to dismiss a known technology so easily, how else do we hope to leave behind oil and other fossil fuels?

Subs and aircraft carriers are military applications which are heavily guarded as are large scale facilities like Sizewell. Imagine guarding 100's of these, wouldn't want one at the end of my road. Give me a wind turbine any day...