| North Sea oil 09:52 - Aug 1 with 5672 views | Cotty |
What the feck are we doing??! |  | | |  |
| North Sea oil on 19:23 - Aug 2 with 1451 views | noggin |
| North Sea oil on 19:18 - Aug 2 by lowhouseblue |
what a cop out. people don't need to be encouraged to want plenty and convenience and novelty and status. humans are acquisitive. we want an easy life with lots of material things. fossil fuels have given us all that. you can't blame some "them". [Post edited 2 Aug 2023 19:34]
|
People want LV handbags and Porsche cars because of convenience? We're told that we want this stuff. [Post edited 2 Aug 2023 19:26]
|  |
| |
| North Sea oil on 19:46 - Aug 2 with 1406 views | lowhouseblue |
| North Sea oil on 19:23 - Aug 2 by noggin |
People want LV handbags and Porsche cars because of convenience? We're told that we want this stuff. [Post edited 2 Aug 2023 19:26]
|
i see so it's only the products and brands you don't want that count as excessive consumerism. what you do consume is just fine. do people want cars for the convenience they provide? of course. was the post war world transformed by the internal combustion engine and all the freedom and convenience and possibilities it offered? absolutely. was the motor car adopted as the core technology of western middle class life only because people were "told they wanted it"? |  |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| North Sea oil on 19:46 - Aug 2 with 1401 views | SuperKieranMcKenna |
| North Sea oil on 19:00 - Aug 2 by noggin |
Who cares? I'll be dead in 40 years. |
I’m glad you raised a similar outrage when Norway issued another round of artic drilling licenses last year. |  | | |
| North Sea oil on 19:49 - Aug 2 with 1383 views | Nthsuffolkblue |
| North Sea oil on 09:58 - Aug 1 by DanTheMan |
We're drilling for more fossil fuels to suit corporate interests under the guise of "energy security" and bundling it up with a fairly unproven technology in carbon capture to try and convince people it's green.
It'll probably work. |
I thought carbon capture was proven technology.
That doesn't change the fact it is a wrong decision to be extracting more oil instead of improving sustainable alternatives that are far less damaging to the environment. |  |
| |
| North Sea oil on 21:13 - Aug 2 with 1342 views | Coastalblue |
So I'm no expert in this, in fact I'm pretty clueless and I understand it is expensive, but if we seriously want to be self sustaining in terms of ebergy and a lot greener why the feck are we not putting funds on a large scale into tidal energy generation.
Covid showed that if the focus is there we can make huge strides. Is it something that inherently won't work? |  |
| |
| North Sea oil on 21:26 - Aug 2 with 1324 views | Swansea_Blue |
| North Sea oil on 21:13 - Aug 2 by Coastalblue |
So I'm no expert in this, in fact I'm pretty clueless and I understand it is expensive, but if we seriously want to be self sustaining in terms of ebergy and a lot greener why the feck are we not putting funds on a large scale into tidal energy generation.
Covid showed that if the focus is there we can make huge strides. Is it something that inherently won't work? |
Given we’ve had a minister who wasn’t aware of the significance of our major port, and an until recently our Prime miniature (I’m nabbing that from Harry) was non-dom, there’s a good chance the government haven’t yet realised we’re an island with a high tidal range!
Or more likely, the fledgling tidal industry can’t compete with the lobbying and kickbacks the government receives from other energy sectors.
Good question though. |  |
| |
| North Sea oil on 23:21 - Aug 2 with 1274 views | Ryorry |
| North Sea oil on 21:26 - Aug 2 by Swansea_Blue |
Given we’ve had a minister who wasn’t aware of the significance of our major port, and an until recently our Prime miniature (I’m nabbing that from Harry) was non-dom, there’s a good chance the government haven’t yet realised we’re an island with a high tidal range!
Or more likely, the fledgling tidal industry can’t compete with the lobbying and kickbacks the government receives from other energy sectors.
Good question though. |
Have said on here numerous times similar things about wave power, which might be a bit more difficult technically, but which I think is less controversial - I know there's been opposition to proposals for installing a tidal capture within the Severn Estuary, eg. |  |
| |
| North Sea oil on 23:22 - Aug 2 with 1273 views | jayessess |
| North Sea oil on 19:46 - Aug 2 by lowhouseblue |
i see so it's only the products and brands you don't want that count as excessive consumerism. what you do consume is just fine. do people want cars for the convenience they provide? of course. was the post war world transformed by the internal combustion engine and all the freedom and convenience and possibilities it offered? absolutely. was the motor car adopted as the core technology of western middle class life only because people were "told they wanted it"? |
We aren't born with an innate desire to be driving around in a motor car. Over about 100 years, humans across the world re-designed their cities, their societies, their social relations around the private car, to the point where millions and millions of people are dependent on them.
Yes, part of that is consumer choices, but it's consumer choices in the context of all sorts of other things about the organisation of society and, yes, about the active creation of markets.
An astonishing proportion of new carbon emissions in the last 20 years (long after we learned about climate change) are from the massive rise in big SUVs. They are, on their own, the second single largest contributor to global emissions increases since 2010. The massive spike in sales wasn't a product of need, convenience or spontaneous demand. Large motor firms designed these vehicles, lobbied governments to let them have less stringent fuel efficiency rules, designed marketing campaigns around hyper-masculinity and ruggedness. They built a market for something people never knew they needed or wanted until relatively recently.
It's absurd that humans started mass producing and selling these things at this point in history. But I don't think it's a case of individual people just being responsible for their consumption at this point. It's a failure of governance, regulation, collective institutions. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 8:15]
|  |
| |
Login to get fewer ads
| North Sea oil on 23:45 - Aug 2 with 1218 views | HARRY10 |
It's now all about positioning himself for the post GE Tory party leadership battle.
So expect this diminutive prime miniature to spend more and more time criss crossing the country in his private jet - Airfix One assuring the assorted bigots that he is their man.
And his proposals are not lunatic rightwing bollox (as suggested by recent by election results) but what the ordinary British voter wants (by ordinary he means the cranks who still imagine Farage is not a cheap two bit grifter).
He can later squeak that his wish to implement this twaddle was thwarted by a hidden force, Eurasia, Farmer Jones, political correctness, the wealthy public school educated elite*, the wokes or whatever the current bogeyman is - rather than it being by the electorate voting him out of office.
He will then claim he wants to rip up all wind/solar farms, make veganism illegal and bring in capital punishment for asylum seekers..... and make wearing skinny trousers that sit way above the ankle compulsory for all adult men.
* is this correct, ed ? | | | |
| North Sea oil on 00:00 - Aug 3 with 1214 views | lowhouseblue |
| North Sea oil on 23:22 - Aug 2 by jayessess |
We aren't born with an innate desire to be driving around in a motor car. Over about 100 years, humans across the world re-designed their cities, their societies, their social relations around the private car, to the point where millions and millions of people are dependent on them.
Yes, part of that is consumer choices, but it's consumer choices in the context of all sorts of other things about the organisation of society and, yes, about the active creation of markets.
An astonishing proportion of new carbon emissions in the last 20 years (long after we learned about climate change) are from the massive rise in big SUVs. They are, on their own, the second single largest contributor to global emissions increases since 2010. The massive spike in sales wasn't a product of need, convenience or spontaneous demand. Large motor firms designed these vehicles, lobbied governments to let them have less stringent fuel efficiency rules, designed marketing campaigns around hyper-masculinity and ruggedness. They built a market for something people never knew they needed or wanted until relatively recently.
It's absurd that humans started mass producing and selling these things at this point in history. But I don't think it's a case of individual people just being responsible for their consumption at this point. It's a failure of governance, regulation, collective institutions. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 8:15]
|
the way in which societies have developed over the last century is hugely dependent on the availability of cheap fossil fuels. it has been driven by consumer desires - for convenience, comfort, material possessions, for freedom and novelty. the middle classes in western countries are the most prosperous people in history - and all of that is based upon cheap fossil fuels. those changes have been consumer led. cars are a great example - they enable a life style which would have been impossible previously - living in big houses in the suburbs, commuting, shopping in supermarkets, travelling freely for social activities - all of which responds to fundamental desires. it is responding to consumer desires. suvs are a logical extension of that - more comfort, more convenience. suvs haven't emerged in the face of consumer opposition. why wouldn't people choose easier, more comfortable, more fun options if they're available.
yes better regulation and governance could have limited these excesses - but it would have bene in the face of consumer and voter opposition. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| North Sea oil on 00:11 - Aug 3 with 1193 views | jayessess |
| North Sea oil on 00:00 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the way in which societies have developed over the last century is hugely dependent on the availability of cheap fossil fuels. it has been driven by consumer desires - for convenience, comfort, material possessions, for freedom and novelty. the middle classes in western countries are the most prosperous people in history - and all of that is based upon cheap fossil fuels. those changes have been consumer led. cars are a great example - they enable a life style which would have been impossible previously - living in big houses in the suburbs, commuting, shopping in supermarkets, travelling freely for social activities - all of which responds to fundamental desires. it is responding to consumer desires. suvs are a logical extension of that - more comfort, more convenience. suvs haven't emerged in the face of consumer opposition. why wouldn't people choose easier, more comfortable, more fun options if they're available.
yes better regulation and governance could have limited these excesses - but it would have bene in the face of consumer and voter opposition. |
Think this massively overestimates the power that consumers have to shape the social context in which they get to make their choices and that voters have over governments.
If the large motor firms hadn't decided they wanted to make and market huge cars for ordinary motorists, there would have been no spontaneous uprising to demand them. That market was deliberately created. It did not have to be (and not permitting its creation would not have caused any great political controversy).
The issue with regulating the motor industry and what it produces has relatively little to do with voters and everything to do with governments being largely subservient to big capital. | |
| |
| North Sea oil on 06:48 - Aug 3 with 1117 views | noggin |
| North Sea oil on 19:46 - Aug 2 by SuperKieranMcKenna |
I’m glad you raised a similar outrage when Norway issued another round of artic drilling licenses last year. |
Outrage? | |
| |
| North Sea oil on 07:52 - Aug 3 with 1087 views | NthQldITFC |
| North Sea oil on 19:18 - Aug 2 by lowhouseblue |
what a cop out. people don't need to be encouraged to want plenty and convenience and novelty and status. humans are acquisitive. we want an easy life with lots of material things. fossil fuels have given us all that. you can't blame some "them". [Post edited 2 Aug 2023 19:34]
|
Even sheep have eyes, ears and brains. Hopefully humans will use their brains to realise unlimited acquisitive = dead. |  |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| North Sea oil on 08:13 - Aug 3 with 1071 views | DanTheMan |
| North Sea oil on 19:49 - Aug 2 by Nthsuffolkblue |
I thought carbon capture was proven technology.
That doesn't change the fact it is a wrong decision to be extracting more oil instead of improving sustainable alternatives that are far less damaging to the environment. |
It's incredibly expensive and a lot of the time it just doesn't work that well.
e.g.
https://www.reuters.com/world/europe/carbon-capture-project-norway-temporarily-h
It's going to have a small part to play but it'll be dwarfed by solar and wind energy sources. |  |
| |
| North Sea oil on 08:24 - Aug 3 with 1047 views | Swansea_Blue |
| North Sea oil on 23:22 - Aug 2 by jayessess |
We aren't born with an innate desire to be driving around in a motor car. Over about 100 years, humans across the world re-designed their cities, their societies, their social relations around the private car, to the point where millions and millions of people are dependent on them.
Yes, part of that is consumer choices, but it's consumer choices in the context of all sorts of other things about the organisation of society and, yes, about the active creation of markets.
An astonishing proportion of new carbon emissions in the last 20 years (long after we learned about climate change) are from the massive rise in big SUVs. They are, on their own, the second single largest contributor to global emissions increases since 2010. The massive spike in sales wasn't a product of need, convenience or spontaneous demand. Large motor firms designed these vehicles, lobbied governments to let them have less stringent fuel efficiency rules, designed marketing campaigns around hyper-masculinity and ruggedness. They built a market for something people never knew they needed or wanted until relatively recently.
It's absurd that humans started mass producing and selling these things at this point in history. But I don't think it's a case of individual people just being responsible for their consumption at this point. It's a failure of governance, regulation, collective institutions. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 8:15]
|
It's almost impossible to apportion blame to any one area I'd have thought. Yes, we can change our behaviour so in some respect we are to blame for creating the demand but, as you say, our demand is obviously shaped by marketing and corporations trying to make more profit by flogging more stuff, and by government supporting markets by offering incentives to businesses.
Or in other words, it's a complex issue that will need the buy-in of individuals to make more informed choices, but change also won't happen without good governance and political leadership.
As an example of the impact of political leadership:
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2023/aug/02/amazon-deforestation-falls-o | |
| |
| North Sea oil on 09:03 - Aug 3 with 1011 views | lowhouseblue |
| North Sea oil on 00:11 - Aug 3 by jayessess |
Think this massively overestimates the power that consumers have to shape the social context in which they get to make their choices and that voters have over governments.
If the large motor firms hadn't decided they wanted to make and market huge cars for ordinary motorists, there would have been no spontaneous uprising to demand them. That market was deliberately created. It did not have to be (and not permitting its creation would not have caused any great political controversy).
The issue with regulating the motor industry and what it produces has relatively little to do with voters and everything to do with governments being largely subservient to big capital. |
the idea that the western middle class has been tricked against its will into having everything it dreamed of is just a cop out. of course firms innovate and find new ways of meeting basic human urges for convenience, novelty, comfort, and status. things lie cars, or indeed suvs, are only a means to those ends (to fulfilling more basic wants). the fact that every consumer didn't separately invent and foresee the suv as the next way of meeting their desires doesn't excuse them of responsibility. firms wouldn't have bothered if consumers didn't want them. and cheap fossil fuel made all of it possible and affordable. suvs were just a logical development of the huge cars always favoured in the usa.
i don't accept at all that in a non- crisis time governments can systematically deny consumers choice and innovation and not be punished by voters. the development of suvs would have been stopped entirely if fossil fuels had not been so cheap. car development - particularly led by the usa where petrol was almost free - has been driven by cheap fuel, heavy and inefficient vehicles are an expression of that. the right policy would have been to make fossil fuels more expensive - innovation would then have proceeded on that basis and resulted in a different world today (less convenient, less plentiful, less easy, less fun for the western middle classes) and no government would have survived that. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| North Sea oil on 09:45 - Aug 3 with 974 views | Ryorry |
| North Sea oil on 09:03 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the idea that the western middle class has been tricked against its will into having everything it dreamed of is just a cop out. of course firms innovate and find new ways of meeting basic human urges for convenience, novelty, comfort, and status. things lie cars, or indeed suvs, are only a means to those ends (to fulfilling more basic wants). the fact that every consumer didn't separately invent and foresee the suv as the next way of meeting their desires doesn't excuse them of responsibility. firms wouldn't have bothered if consumers didn't want them. and cheap fossil fuel made all of it possible and affordable. suvs were just a logical development of the huge cars always favoured in the usa.
i don't accept at all that in a non- crisis time governments can systematically deny consumers choice and innovation and not be punished by voters. the development of suvs would have been stopped entirely if fossil fuels had not been so cheap. car development - particularly led by the usa where petrol was almost free - has been driven by cheap fuel, heavy and inefficient vehicles are an expression of that. the right policy would have been to make fossil fuels more expensive - innovation would then have proceeded on that basis and resulted in a different world today (less convenient, less plentiful, less easy, less fun for the western middle classes) and no government would have survived that. |
Those in genuine need of suvs, living out in the sticks, should have been required to stick with Landrover Defenders. It's often quoted that 70% of all those ever made are still on the road. I doubt that's the case now, can't find an exact post 2020 figure, but 50%+ seems likely according to other sources.
https://www.industryweek.com/the-economy/article/21968728/its-the-end-of-the-lin | |
| |
| North Sea oil on 09:48 - Aug 3 with 968 views | NthQldITFC |
| North Sea oil on 09:03 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the idea that the western middle class has been tricked against its will into having everything it dreamed of is just a cop out. of course firms innovate and find new ways of meeting basic human urges for convenience, novelty, comfort, and status. things lie cars, or indeed suvs, are only a means to those ends (to fulfilling more basic wants). the fact that every consumer didn't separately invent and foresee the suv as the next way of meeting their desires doesn't excuse them of responsibility. firms wouldn't have bothered if consumers didn't want them. and cheap fossil fuel made all of it possible and affordable. suvs were just a logical development of the huge cars always favoured in the usa.
i don't accept at all that in a non- crisis time governments can systematically deny consumers choice and innovation and not be punished by voters. the development of suvs would have been stopped entirely if fossil fuels had not been so cheap. car development - particularly led by the usa where petrol was almost free - has been driven by cheap fuel, heavy and inefficient vehicles are an expression of that. the right policy would have been to make fossil fuels more expensive - innovation would then have proceeded on that basis and resulted in a different world today (less convenient, less plentiful, less easy, less fun for the western middle classes) and no government would have survived that. |
The crucial point is at the top of your second paragraph.
It absolutely staggers me that so many people won't accept or don't understand that we are in a 'crisis time' - by a million miles the biggest fckng 'crisis time' we have seen or ever will see.
Just at look in the eyes of António Guterres or David Attenborough or Greta Thunberg when they speak to us, and you'll start to get an understanding of what sort of 'crisis time' we are entering. | |
| # WE ARE STEALING THE FUTURE FROM OUR CHILDREN --- WE MUST CHANGE COURSE # | | Poll: | It's driving me nuts |
| |
| North Sea oil on 11:51 - Aug 3 with 917 views | jayessess |
| North Sea oil on 09:03 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the idea that the western middle class has been tricked against its will into having everything it dreamed of is just a cop out. of course firms innovate and find new ways of meeting basic human urges for convenience, novelty, comfort, and status. things lie cars, or indeed suvs, are only a means to those ends (to fulfilling more basic wants). the fact that every consumer didn't separately invent and foresee the suv as the next way of meeting their desires doesn't excuse them of responsibility. firms wouldn't have bothered if consumers didn't want them. and cheap fossil fuel made all of it possible and affordable. suvs were just a logical development of the huge cars always favoured in the usa.
i don't accept at all that in a non- crisis time governments can systematically deny consumers choice and innovation and not be punished by voters. the development of suvs would have been stopped entirely if fossil fuels had not been so cheap. car development - particularly led by the usa where petrol was almost free - has been driven by cheap fuel, heavy and inefficient vehicles are an expression of that. the right policy would have been to make fossil fuels more expensive - innovation would then have proceeded on that basis and resulted in a different world today (less convenient, less plentiful, less easy, less fun for the western middle classes) and no government would have survived that. |
I haven't argued that anyone was "tricked against their will". We make our own choices, but we do not make them as we please, we do not make them under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.
Apportioning personal moral responsibility is largely irrelevant here. The scale of the climate crisis and the complexity of human societies makes it utterly utopian (a cop out even!) to imagine that individual choice is a serious mechanism for change. It can only be about changing the circumstances those choices are made under and that's about large collective institutions (the state and capital). | |
| |
| North Sea oil on 11:56 - Aug 3 with 898 views | lowhouseblue |
| North Sea oil on 11:51 - Aug 3 by jayessess |
I haven't argued that anyone was "tricked against their will". We make our own choices, but we do not make them as we please, we do not make them under self-selected circumstances, but under circumstances existing already, given and transmitted from the past.
Apportioning personal moral responsibility is largely irrelevant here. The scale of the climate crisis and the complexity of human societies makes it utterly utopian (a cop out even!) to imagine that individual choice is a serious mechanism for change. It can only be about changing the circumstances those choices are made under and that's about large collective institutions (the state and capital). |
the personal and moral responsibility here is that we (middle classes in the rich west) now need to change our ways. our life style and consumption is the problem. it's not the system, it's not capitalism, it's not faceless corporations, it's us and our behaviour and our consumption. we need to fly less, drive less, consume less etc. etc. | |
| And so as the loose-bowelled pigeon of time swoops low over the unsuspecting tourist of destiny, and the flatulent skunk of fate wanders into the air-conditioning system of eternity, I notice it's the end of the show |
| |
| North Sea oil on 12:15 - Aug 3 with 851 views | jayessess |
| North Sea oil on 11:56 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the personal and moral responsibility here is that we (middle classes in the rich west) now need to change our ways. our life style and consumption is the problem. it's not the system, it's not capitalism, it's not faceless corporations, it's us and our behaviour and our consumption. we need to fly less, drive less, consume less etc. etc. |
Like I say, just airily saying that people should behave differently is not meaningfully a mechanism for change when you're talking about global scale problems in complex societies.
And it's a massive cop out to say it's not worth confronting any of the power structures that shape global human society because it's all just individuals choosing to do stuff. | |
| |
| North Sea oil on 12:15 - Aug 3 with 851 views | noggin |
| North Sea oil on 11:56 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the personal and moral responsibility here is that we (middle classes in the rich west) now need to change our ways. our life style and consumption is the problem. it's not the system, it's not capitalism, it's not faceless corporations, it's us and our behaviour and our consumption. we need to fly less, drive less, consume less etc. etc. |
The authorities have a responsibility to encourage us to consume less. They won't though because of personal interests. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 12:17]
| |
| |
| North Sea oil on 12:40 - Aug 3 with 815 views | eireblue |
| North Sea oil on 11:56 - Aug 3 by lowhouseblue |
the personal and moral responsibility here is that we (middle classes in the rich west) now need to change our ways. our life style and consumption is the problem. it's not the system, it's not capitalism, it's not faceless corporations, it's us and our behaviour and our consumption. we need to fly less, drive less, consume less etc. etc. |
Hmmmm faceless corporations you say….
https://medium.com/climate-conscious/why-the-carbon-footprint-is-a-blatant-form- |  | | |
| North Sea oil on 12:53 - Aug 3 with 792 views | jayessess |
Indeed, very well known that oil companies have been pretty active in finding ways that make climate change a problem of individual choices rather than societal change. Get us all yelling "hypocrite" at each other for everything we do and consume, rather than doing anything collectively.
Reality is humans don't produce, distribute, consume, as individuals, we do all those things as societies, in social modes of production. You can't unpick patterns in any of those areas by just saying people should be different. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 12:53]
| |
| |
| North Sea oil on 13:10 - Aug 3 with 761 views | eireblue |
| North Sea oil on 12:53 - Aug 3 by jayessess |
Indeed, very well known that oil companies have been pretty active in finding ways that make climate change a problem of individual choices rather than societal change. Get us all yelling "hypocrite" at each other for everything we do and consume, rather than doing anything collectively.
Reality is humans don't produce, distribute, consume, as individuals, we do all those things as societies, in social modes of production. You can't unpick patterns in any of those areas by just saying people should be different. [Post edited 3 Aug 2023 12:53]
|
Yep, of course I find myself in the position of being a vegan that, has on occasion, mentioned one of the ways that is optimal for being impactful and easy to do in order to help the planet. | | | |
| |
By continuing to use the site, you agree to our use of cookies and to abide by our Terms and Conditions.
