It's not a cost of living crisis, it's the solution to the climate crisis

[Jackov Altraids]

In a perfect world according to you.

Not noticed the Ukraine War ? Or the fact Ukraine grew Oilseed Rape with UK banned presiticides ? Were Ukraines products banned on import ?

"Properly Taxxed" does that include Monaco ? Luxemburg ? Switzerland ? Camon Islands ? Isle of White ?

The world DOES need increased productivity. The world also needs those who advocate "Recycling" to actually do it rather than talking about it and running away with large amounts of money having burnt or dumped the "Recycling".

I find it VERY disturbing that you even think Growth is not essential - actually it is appalling. Take GPS in tractors, I know this makes the job far less tiring and more productive not just in utilisation of the machine but also of time. Time to ensure everything else is running better.

Why use false generic statements such as "The more you work, the more you spend to save time. It's a vicious circle." ? If you spent no money and you relied on yourself for everything you'd have very, very little (Not even matches) and would die as a result of any minor accident. Probably the first cold weather would kill most people.

You don't go to the gym because you've sat at a desk all day. You go to the gym for social and health reasons. But you don't have to go at all.

Your last statement is worthy of a good globalist slave - whilst you are accepting your lot, the rich are in Monaco pissing your small resources up the wall of their £100+ million yacht whilst paying no taxes at all.

My post was entirely hypothetical in order to try to explain my point.

But you have very succinctly highlighted the crux of the problem.
The world population as we know it depends on growth.
The planet cannot sustain continual growth.

The huge gulf in wealth of society must be addressed but ones happiness is not necessarily dictated by ones bank balance.

 

[wanton dwarf]

My post was entirely hypothetical in order to try to explain my point.

But you have very succinctly highlighted the crux of the problem.
The world population as we know it depends on growth.
The planet cannot sustain continual growth.

The huge gulf in wealth of society must be addressed but ones happiness is not necessarily dictated by ones bank balance.

No, don't agree.

If Humans want to consume less resources, have more free time and equality.

Then you need growth. Because the less consumption of energy, time & resources to get the same thing increases the Quality of Life and creates less pollution.

With growth the only thing you need to get a more viable planet is at least the same number of people or less.

Of course there is no limit to reducing energy, time & resources to produce the same thing - which is growth.

There is nothing to limit the gulf in wealth either - governments are activily moving decisions away from democracy and accountability by using the UN, EU, WEF etc.

Happiness is a state of mind. Looking for problems that don't exist - where exactly are you getting these statements about growth ? They are totally wrong.

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

Energy prices under pin every human activity.

Increasing energy prices means everything gets more expensive.

Ultimately that means the poorest will begin to starve which increases prices more. Quality of life will decrease - less health care because energy prices, less ability to get to health care because cannot afford a car, less ability to get food because cannot afford a car, spread diseases because using public transport.

But, as Pete's video points out, the EROEI keeps falling with fossil fuels, even while we ignore the environmental costs. We can't just go on using more of them. It has been estimated that currently, on average, we use 10 calories of fossil fuel energy to create each calorie of human food energy; we are, in effect, eating oil. The fact it's the biggest game in town is simply because fossil fuels get huge subsidy on top of being allowed to ignore their socially inconvenient costs. They are cheap because of distorted pricing.

High energy prices is the dumbest thing you could possibly do. In an economy which depends totally on the usage of electricity to do most education, maintenance, communications .. what do you think is going to happen ? Less or more productivity ?


Energy prices should be kept as low as possible.

I'd argue that's the problem. We must wean ourselves off such extreme dependence on excessive energy use.

As one example, heating homes MUST be made more efficient by insulating them properly. Energy demand must fall.

And the CCC agree: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61926275

 

[Jackov Altraids]

No, don't agree.

If Humans want to consume less resources, have more free time and equality.

Then you need growth. Because the less consumption of energy, time & resources to get the same thing increases the Quality of Life and creates less pollution.

With growth the only thing you need to get a more viable planet is at least the same number of people or less.

Of course there is no limit to reducing energy, time & resources to produce the same thing - which is growth.

There is nothing to limit the gulf in wealth either - governments are activily moving decisions away from democracy and accountability by using the UN, EU, WEF etc.

Happiness is a state of mind. Looking for problems that don't exist - where exactly are you getting these statements about growth ? They are totally wrong.

I think you are conflating growth and development.
They have often been inseparable but they don't have to be, especially in the world today.
As a species, humans had to grow in order to develop. Societies developed which sustained growth.
In the developed world, growth is only required to accumulate wealth. Development often creates growth but doesn't require it.
Growth in itself is predicated on extra consumption. I can't think of an example of extra consumption that didn't increase the use of a resource, most of which are finite. As such, it is not sustainable.

Any farmer should understand this principle.
A mixed farm that was self sufficient might be able to grow with certain developments and improvements.
There is a limit to what that farm can sustain without buying in resources.
As a planet, we can't buy in extra resources.

 

[som farmer]

its like pyramid selling, its ok for them at the top, but gets worse as you go down.
Energy and food prices, have been left to stagnate, which reduced their value, in actual, and perceived cost. And people simply assumed that was 'normal'. Clever advertising created a society, that put, 'enjoyment' above the basic requirements. And l can understand some of that, if you have a dull, repetitive job, leisure time, becomes vital.
But, as was always going to happen, the wheels have come off, and now there is a crisis.
and a large portion of our society, are in a big mess, one could argue, its one of their own making, perhaps we should blame them, but l think its a 'big business' problem, they have hijacked our societal needs, and turned them into an income stream, for them, without any remorse.
That is now history, we are in the mess, that was always going to happen - sometime in the future. There isn't really a remedy, people cannot earn enough, to extract themselves, from debt, and pay for inflation, and the more that is paid, to cover inflation, the less spent on taxable goods, which leads to more unemployment etc.
Niether energy, or food, can be replaced, something the green zealots, have yet to realise.
The only one of those 2 basics, that could be resolved, is energy, if the scientist can discover a cheaper source, but energy price, while high now, could, and will drop back, if it doesn't rise next year, it will have zero effect, on inflation.
There isn't an answer, its got to work through, with all the dire problems that will come, with it. There is no 'magic button', to solve it, except higher wages, that lead to other problems.

 

[britishblue]

When my wife moved in 9 years ago for some reason we both remember a pack of butter at Lidls was 48p. That same packet is now £1.75. Has the price of milk gone up 3.5 times or is it the increased cost of processing that has caused the price increase?

 

[slackjawedyokel]

Apparently we’re doing really badly with our climate change goals, so we will have to fly less and eat less meat

Climate change: UK government told to insulate more homes

The Climate Change Committee says the lack of a policy to insulate people's homes is "shocking".

www.bbc.co.uk

Well, I haven’t flown for years, and I’m defo not eating less meat!

 

[DaveGrohl]

Apparently we’re doing really badly with our climate change goals, so we will have to fly less and eat less meat

Climate change: UK government told to insulate more homes

The Climate Change Committee says the lack of a policy to insulate people's homes is "shocking".

www.bbc.co.uk

Well, I haven’t flown for years, and I’m defo not eating less meat!

Wowsers. It’ll be interesting to see exactly what is said in the report rather than Roger Harridan’s version of it.

Mind, from that, it doesn’t appear that the CCC have become any more competent in reviewing the actual science.

 

[Ffermer Bach]

But, as Pete's video points out, the EROEI keeps falling with fossil fuels, even while we ignore the environmental costs. We can't just go on using more of them. It has been estimated that currently, on average, we use 10 calories of fossil fuel energy to create each calorie of human food energy; we are, in effect, eating oil. The fact it's the biggest game in town is simply because fossil fuels get huge subsidy on top of being allowed to ignore their socially inconvenient costs. They are cheap because of distorted pricing.


I'd argue that's the problem. We must wean ourselves off such extreme dependence on excessive energy use.

As one example, heating homes MUST be made more efficient by insulating them properly. Energy demand must fall.

And the CCC agree: https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-61926275

when people on here talk about (or actually are dismissive of both organic and regenerative farming) organic as not being able to feed the world, I think the metric we should be measuring all our food production against is how many calories of fossil fuels does it take to produce one calorie of food. My gut feeling would be that the most efficient farming systems would be either permaculture gardening or pasture produced livestock. I wonder if we could feed the world with a combination of those two? And I wonder why there never seem to be any studies (that I have heard of anyway) to look into food costs in term of fossil fuel use?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

And I wonder why there never seem to be any studies (that I have heard of anyway) to look into food costs in term of fossil fuel use?

Because the outcome would most likely be rather inconvenient for those bodies who fund most food research?

 

[britishblue]

I watched a youtube GB News clip that stated their had been a report that the world temp had not changed for 15 years but report was kept very quiet from media and it did not get broadcast across mass media outlets because it portrayed the wrong message.

 

[som farmer]

is it climate change, or changing climate ? Not sure anybody can answer that, for 100% accuracy.
Its easy to say the UK, has been terrible about cc, what do they compare it against ? Rather think we might actually be, one of the better countries, for reducing carbon.
Again, if there is no agreed formula, to actually measure carbon, how can anyone say, good, bad or average ?
My view is, we have to be a lot more sensible, in how we live, carbon is harmful, and should be reduced, but farming contributes very little, and holds the solution to store, vast amounts of carbon. However, it is easier to blame farming, rather than the luxuries of live, holidays, cars etc.
And farming cannot win the argument, simply because to many people, won't admit to the real polluters, themselves.

 

[Swarfmonkey]

Wowsers. It’ll be interesting to see exactly what is said in the report rather than Roger Harridan’s version of it.

Mind, from that, it doesn’t appear that the CCC have become any more competent in reviewing the actual science.

The only thing the CCC is competent at is pushing a narrative that just happens to financially benefit many of it's members, from it's Chairman's business interests through to the Orsted (worlds biggest offshore wind farm developer) shareholders that sit on it.

The whole thing stinks.

 

[le bon paysan]

I watched a youtube GB News clip that stated their had been a report that the world temp had not changed for 15 years but report was kept very quiet from media and it did not get broadcast across mass media outlets because it portrayed the wrong message.

GB News are very good at cherry picking . Different subject but this wasn't the result they expected/wanted so it was removed pdq.

 

[DaveGrohl]

And I wonder why there never seem to be any studies (that I have heard of anyway) to look into food costs in term of fossil fuel use?

Because the outcome would most likely be rather inconvenient for those bodies who fund most food research?

The companies that provide the money for the "research" would be cutting their own throats.

 

[britishblue]

And the BBC don't cherry pick le bon paysan?

 

[holwellcourtfarm]

And the BBC don't cherry pick le bon paysan?

ALL news "outlets" are biased.

Some more than others....

The BBC is no different.

 

[som farmer]

GB News are very good at cherry picking . Different subject but this wasn't the result they expected/wanted so it was removed pdq.
View attachment 1046024

its a very serious question
there is no doubt that it was a well intentioned, and much needed action
however, as with all things similar, it starts to grow, and grow, and evolves into something, that has decided its job, is to dictate, how all Europeans, should conduct their lives.
As democracies, we vote on how our politicians should rule us, but it has become an all powering body, that makes decisions, that effect others.
The classic examples are refugees, the rules are, seek asylum in the EU country they enter, but many end up, illegally entering the UK, helped along the way, i suspect, by 'officials' turning a blind eye. That is EU law.
I have no problem with genuine refugees, but many who enter this country, are criminals, rapists or murderers, to boot. Why should they, be allowed, to remain in our country ? It is against the wishes of the majority. And yet, we cannot deport them, because the convention dictates otherwise.
I have sympathy to pridi patel, whatever she tries to do, she is thwarted by the ECHR, interpreting, the Euro human rights, even if they re-offend here, we cannot get rid of them.
Stopping the 'boat people' crossing the channel, the guv, has its hands tied by ECHR and ERC, which makes it difficult/impossible to stop., and makes lawyers and traffickers very rich.
As l said, genuine refugees, should find a home here, economic migrants, and criminals, should obey EU rules, and apply in the EU country they enter.
As a proud democratic country, with a long history of helping refugees, we should be able, to decide, who has the right, to live in our society, and to follow our rules, and laws, if they do not, then they are free to leave, except they don't.

 

[Jackov Altraids]

Apparently we’re doing really badly with our climate change goals, so we will have to fly less and eat less meat

Climate change: UK government told to insulate more homes

The Climate Change Committee says the lack of a policy to insulate people's homes is "shocking".

www.bbc.co.uk

Well, I haven’t flown for years, and I’m defo not eating less meat!

Wherever I look, the packaging is telling me environmentally friendly the product is or how the carbon is being offset. I've even seen it written on arrival at Heathrow.

I then see it said that it is farming that needs to change.

Right now i hear pretty much everyone squealing about the price of fuel and energy more than farmers.
Funny that.

 

[DaveGrohl]

Wherever I look, the packaging is telling me environmentally friendly the product is or how the carbon is being offset. I've even seen it written on arrival at Heathrow.

I then see it said that it is farming that needs to change.

Right now i hear pretty much everyone squealing about the price of fuel and energy more than farmers.
Funny that.

You’d laugh if you weren’t already crying.

In cleb news, Kim Kardashian is the face of Beyond Meat now, summat to do with saving the planet no doubt. She’s also been advertising getting into Bitcoin/crypto. That’ll be the same Bitcoin that is creating more GHG emissions than Norway ……