Thunder Bolt
Silly old bat
In the 60s the paint was removed with nobody having a hissy fit.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
[News] Just Stop Oil
- Thread starter dazzer6666
- Start date
HalfaSeatOn
Well-known member
I’m sure stones that have been around through it all would wisely nod and wink.
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
I thought you might pipe up with something along those lines, and I don't agree with it to be honest. I'd most definitely prefer we produced and consumed more local goods to reduce movements around the world (it is utterly stupid that we are importing coal and steel to this country for instance), however the fact of the matter is we are being undercut by foreign nations who don't have as stringent controls as us - it is wrong headed for us to try to take the blame for what they are choosing to do.I agree that JSO’s tactics are not endearing their cause to many people but whataboutery is not the answer.
Nor is suggesting that the UK’s contribution to CC is ”negligible ”. That view belies a misunderstanding of the indirect impact the UK has on CC by virtue of our industrial/overseas development and trade. UK based consumption drives emissions across the Globe - nearly half of the UK carbon footprint is from emissions released overseas YET are not included in national emissions reporting or targeted by domestic climate change policy - for example:
- The UK exports around 60% of the over 2.5 million tonnes of plastic packaging waste it creates. Turkey is the main destination for this waste. British plastic waste is being dumped and burned in Turkey, causing “irreversible and shocking” environmental and human health impacts.
- China is the world’s leading nation in CO2 admissions and has the largest industrialised GDP (nearly 40% of China’s GPD is from value added industrial output) , yet nearly 20% of China’s GDP until recently was from exported manufactured goods bound for markets like the UK. Despite global economic conditions along with isolationist and protectionist policies suppressing the Chinese export market, the UK still imported nearly £60 billion worth of manufactured products to the UK last year - goods demanded by British consumers that contribute towards the carbon footprint caused by China’s productive industries.
- The UK investments with British taxpayer’s money in overseas fossil fuel companies in several African countries also contribute to emissions overseas, including £32.2m investment to build a power plant in Guinea that uses so-called Heavy Fuel Oil (HFO) which has been described as the “world’s dirtiest and most polluting” type of marine fuel - ( HFO has been banned for use in the Arctic by the UN )
The more that Britain deindustrialises and decarbonises domestic food, goods and services production, the more we rely on offshoring to meet domestic demands - climate policy and public perceptions of our responsibility based on purely domestic emissions doesn’t account for Britain’s global contribution to climate change through our carbon footprint overseas.
UK government under fire for investing overseas aid in fossil fuel firms
Taxpayer’s money also going to companies found to be flouting human rights in Kenya and DRC, says Commons committeewww.theguardian.com
Yes, we could also choose not to buy from them, but it would be at the cost of impoverishing our own economy, and it certainly wouldn't help theirs either.
I take a mild offence at being accused of whataboutery when I did no such thing, but that is your opinion, and you are allowed to express it.
Last edited:
- Oct 20, 2022
- 6,948
I’m pretty sure I’m not the only one on this thread who is aware of our carbon footprint or the already devastating impacts of CC on low lying Countries.
Also not sure what you are actually disagreeing with - What I posted are widely verified facts about our foreign trade and investments/waste disposal rather than opinion.
Imo it is whataboutery to use immigration as an excuse for not worrying about the Climate crisis - however, if you don’t accept the whataboutery of your immigration argument above, at least accept that if you want to include “immigration” in the Climate debate, then it should be done in a way that is relevant because Climate change is already on the way to becoming the biggest driver of immigration in the next 30 years:
Last edited:
No social media back then for people to post hissy fits.
I’m told my granddad shouted “bloody long haired layabouts” at his wireless
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
I'm not trying to upset you @Zeberdi, I knew you had an interest in the subject from other posts you have made elsewhere, and a different take on it to me, so I was unsurprised when you commented on my post, which I fully accept you have the right to do. So I apologise if my choice of words were taken the wrong way.
You presumably do accept that every country, and indeed individual make their own choices about who they trade with and how they produce goods and services? Which is my point - we aren't forcing other countries to trade with us or anyone else, nor are we setting their climate policies for them, despite the fact that it can disadvantage us economically, and has stripped away out manufacturing base.
No I don't want to introduce illegal immigration, private ownership of utilities, or culture wars into the climate debate! Anybody should be able to see I was merely pointing out that those are examples of political issues that are likely more important to the general population of the UK than the climate and the JSO idiots.
We shouldn't do ourselves down as a nation on the climate issue, as it is plain to see with every EV on the road, every new solar panel installed, and wind farm erected, that we are heading in the right direction.
You presumably do accept that every country, and indeed individual make their own choices about who they trade with and how they produce goods and services? Which is my point - we aren't forcing other countries to trade with us or anyone else, nor are we setting their climate policies for them, despite the fact that it can disadvantage us economically, and has stripped away out manufacturing base.
No I don't want to introduce illegal immigration, private ownership of utilities, or culture wars into the climate debate! Anybody should be able to see I was merely pointing out that those are examples of political issues that are likely more important to the general population of the UK than the climate and the JSO idiots.
We shouldn't do ourselves down as a nation on the climate issue, as it is plain to see with every EV on the road, every new solar panel installed, and wind farm erected, that we are heading in the right direction.
Goldstone Guy
Well-known member
Agreed about public utilities, although seeing how the government run the NHS doesn't fill me with hope re the water companies being publicly owned. We need to elect a competent government for that plan to work.
As for illegal migration what we've tried unsuccessfully to deal with so far has been nothing, a mere trickle of people. Wait until Bangladesh is under water and most of Africa is uninhabitable, then we'll get some proper illegal immigration. That's if you believe the scientists, which I do. I saw a T-shirt recently which said something like "Every disaster movie starts with someone ignoring a scientist". I don't think there are more troubling things than climate change. Perhaps Putin launching hundreds of nuclear missiles but not much else.
- Oct 20, 2022
- 6,948
No apologies necessary and - well, at least JSO‘s latest antics has got us all talking
I actually agree with your perception of how the electorate prioritise issues (unfortunately ) - that’s exactly why environmental campaigners are resorting to more shocking tactics - because of the (future) longterm nature of the anticipated worst impacts of climate change, it has simply been bounced off the table by more immediate issues.
My whole point about all this is that people need to stop seeing the Climate Crisis as someone’s else’s fault; someone else’s problem to sort out or ‘tomorrow’s problem’. That was why the legally binding nature of the Kyoto targets were a fiasco 27 years ago and why the US and Canada refused to ratify it - they refused to accept that developing countries like China and Japan would get a pass on tough targets.
The Paris Agreement was a major achievement in getting consensus because the targets are voluntary (each Country pledging their own commitments to suit themselves) but that too is showing signs of being too weak a framework and an inadequate response to the Crisis we are facing.
Without some sort of external coercion, most countries imo aren't likely to step up their game and make the radical changes to keep us anywhere close to 2°C for exactly the reasons you say - if we leave the future of our planet in the hands of each individual nation to respond as they see fit, of course they aren’t going to implement policies that disadvantage them while others nations refuse to make similar sacrifices.
Last edited:
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
No apologies necessary and - well, at least JSO‘s latest antics has got us all talking
Quite. I suspect we actually agree on more things to do with the climate than we disagree on in all honesty.
You rightly point out that it will take a global effort to reduce humanities impact on the environment, sadly there isn't an easy path to doing that. If there were one that didn't involve serious moral and ethical problems* we'd have already taken it.
* along the lines of:- population x needs to stay poor and cold, and have no aspirations of betterment, so we can attempt to control this problem.
NorthstandRacoon
Well-known member
But you can speed up the transition. Introduce critical changes and struct laws that protect the environment.
This should never come down to costs, it is our children’s and their children’s futures ffs.
- Apr 13, 2015
- 3,866
It absolutely should come down to cost,... this should be a managed move towards a technologically innovative set of solutions..... solutions that balance the sustainable economic picture with sustainable changes to the way we live, and pay to live.... but I suspect you already know that, but prefer to kiss the feet of an erratic Scandinavian former schoolgirl.
Curious Orange
Punxsatawney Phil
Cost will always be the key driver of change, if it becomes cheaper to produce energy with less emissions then that is what will happen.
worthingweird
Well-known member
- Mar 8, 2023
- 360
Give the twats a criminal record, this can really do some damage...
- Oct 17, 2008
- 14,540
One of them already has a criminal record with numerous convictions, he was in prison in 2022. Career criminal.
worthingseagull123
Well-known member
- May 5, 2012
- 2,688
They are complete oddballs with ignorant and bizarre ideas.
Someone is exploiting them to action. They all look like misfits who do not fit in with mainstream society, that is for sure.
Someone is exploiting them to action. They all look like misfits who do not fit in with mainstream society, that is for sure.
Insel affe
HellBilly
The potential for carnage was massive im not surprised the old bill have done something in advance
Dozens of campaigners held over alleged airport plans
https://www.bbc.com/news/articles/ce98dqn19plo
Doonhamer7
Well-known member
- Jun 17, 2016
- 1,454
Bp announced yesterday they are pulling back their investment in green energy, following on from Shell. Real reason since they did this is their share price hasn't gone up at same rate as chevron and Exxon Mobil. So if you want real change you have change the minds of the companies Blackrock, Morgan Stanley, and Vanguard etc - they are the ones that can change the IOC behaviour and force them to change.
just stop oil also needs to catch up, the “oil and gas“ industry is now called “energy security” industry.
just stop oil also needs to catch up, the “oil and gas“ industry is now called “energy security” industry.
Billy the Fish
Technocrat
How do you beat an OCG? Cut off the head of course!
Conspiracy to commit crime lands you in prison, who knew
Conspiracy to commit crime lands you in prison, who knew
TomandJerry
Well-known member
- Oct 1, 2013
- 12,323
Five supporters of the Just Stop Oil climate campaign who conspired to cause gridlock on London’s orbital motorway have been sentenced to lengthy jail terms.
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence on Thursday, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
Roger Hallam, Daniel Shaw, Louise Lancaster, Lucia Whittaker De Abreu and Cressida Gethin were found guilty last week of conspiracy to cause a public nuisance for coordinating direct action protests on the M25 over four days in November 2022.
Hallam received a five year sentence on Thursday, while the other four were each sentenced to four years.
