To resent the cognitive dissonance that exists around climate change

Yeah that really annoyed me too, suppose it doesn't matter if James or Nigel are taking their big fancy cars to work but why should a silly woman choose comfort to get her children from A to B.

Also totally agree about the day to day. We can all buy fresh local fruit, veg and eggs where we can, cut down meat if you eat it, same with dairy etc etc.

Don’t open the “pets” can of worms
for many that is the sacrifice too far, they’d not consider not having a pet for any reason!

The latter particularly grates. We have a huge climate crisis. Yet Joanna or Nicola has to have a Discovery Sport for her three kids because she needs to sit high up, it’s easier to load them in, and she worries about crash worthiness.

I don’t drive at all and would be your natural ally on some points but this sexist BS can fuck all the way off.

And I expect you’ll think that’s beside the point/trivial or whatever but it’s not, actually, because it makes me doubt your capacity for genuine insight on the wider issue.

Yup, I agree this is how it will go. And we'll be buying even more eco-conscious mascaras and taking even more foreign holidays, always chasing the sense of fulfilment that we no longer get through work. And it will never be enough. It's a self-perpetuating cycle.

Agree and disagree.

It's not "just one group's way of making money". Big business always finds a way to monetise things, climate change included unfortunately. Small distinction, but an important one.

Also, a side note but people who worked in tech around Y2K get very frustrated by people laughing off the 'millennium bug'. It was a legitimate concern that was averted by a great many IT workers manually re-programming systems.

@zaxxon and why is a better education a bad thing? What negative environmental impact is a better education having on our planet out of interest?

Private school IS consumerism! It's parents shopping for a better education for their child.

That post just shows how deeply the neoliberal ethos ("my money, my choice") is embedded in our psyches. It's the air we breathe nowadays - we're barely even aware of it.

THICK walls (not “think”)

Not really, I rent out a property (can’t sell for various reasons). It has think walls without a cavity, insulation against those walls. The EPC assessor first used default assumptions based on the type of property (old cottage) that it would have none = terrible EPC. Had to argue with him that there was actually some insulation there (had just been added) buy showing him some of the receipts and details on the billing from the builder, he didn’t seem to have any means (or intention to) establish it himself. Lots of buildings in the UK can’t be significantly upgraded but there is a huge amount of embedded carbon in them and to rebuild in a more energy efficient fashion would many years to actually to reach a “climate positive” point in the life cycle.

But surely raising EPC ratings means that rental homes will have to be better insulated, meaning that they will be warmer and cheaper to heat?

Also, what do you mean by "electrical heating systems"? Again, if you mean a heat pump installed at the LL's expense, that's a great benefit to the tenant. (Speaking as someone who lives in social housing with a landlord- installed heat pump, and who is warm and toasty with low bills).

If a state, corporation, or individual does something to preserve the environment, that carries a real or perceived cost to them, but the benefit is shared with the entire planet. Rational self-interest thus requires they not take action (either others will do so, making the sacrifice unnecessary, or will not do so, making it futile).

I hope that human so-called civilisation will collapse sufficiently rapidly that some larger life forms will be spared in the already ongoing sixth mass extinction.

Yes the poor are most impacted, usually.... LA not quite so.

The poor though, as individuals, emit the least, they tend not to drive much, walk/use public transport, don't go on holidays BUT are the ones hit hardest with energy, food and clothing costs.

Now their rents/heating costs are going to soar because Labour have said Landlords must have an EPC of C by 2030 and if you look on any LL forum, this means houses sold or costs passed onto the tenant.
But its worse than that, as the EPC is also changing, so LLs will have to install electric heating systems, far more costly for tenants to run.

Meanwhile, people who promote NetZero will not be affected at all by the extra costs, drive around in their ultra large v expensive EVs, fly business class, heat their huge houses with abandon.. & jet off abroad whenever they like.

There is a distinct lack of leadership by the environmental lobby.

England could disappear off the planet tomorrow and it wouldn't make a blind bit of difference to what is happening climate wise.

No, it's not. Yes, the uk has very little manufacturing now and China manufactures tons but who is consuming what China is manufacturing? We have basically lowered our carbon footprint by outsourcing it to China, which looks great on our own record but makes no difference to the world..

Our Government is too busy taxing those evil private schools who dare to educate our children than taxing consumerism.

This

Yes to everything you said. I feel like I'm living in a twilight zone at times when surrounded by people actively purchasing bigger cars, more plastic shite and almost purposefully pursuing a less sustainable lifestyle. BUT I can understand how people feel helpless. The reality is that anything the typical family does has zero impact when China, US etc are pouring out emissions on the scale they are. Big business and billionaires are to blame, not us mere mortals.

I agree with this. The people who worked in “dirty” skilled energy intensive jobs which are no longer here rarely benefit from increases in new “green” jobs. For all the talk, the reality is the vast majority of those jobs go to different people in different places.

With private jets taking them to the summits to discuss how the average Joe should reduce their carbon footprint.

You were unreasonable in your title cognitive dissonance. That was enough to annoy me .

Also anything to do with climate change, it’s just one groups way of making money.
Like the ozone layer and the millennium bug, and carbon offsetting. All based around select groups of peoples’ wealth creation

B&M sells stuff - tat - because people buy it

Stop buying it and they won't make it to sell

So yes every action helps

Just imagine if everyone took the attitude that nothing really mattered and we couldn't change anything - then look and see how the UK is changing slowly - too slowly . So some is slower rate of growth of bad things but it's still a positive change over what could have been

I work in environmental science, nothing we do as individuals will make a difference when corporations are still trading in the way that they do and producing the crap that they do. You only have to walk in B&M, or similar stores to see the amount of unnecessary tat that will be in landfill within 5 years. The UK not using plastic water bottles and single use plastic is great but when there are whole states in America many times the size of the UK that only use bottled water as their tap water is so poor and contaminated it makes very little difference globally. Although plastic bottles are readily recyclable and actually some of their replacements are not.

My all means make the choices that suit you and help you feel better, and benefits your local area but long term it is a country and multinational corporation problem.

The other issue is that any government that imposes the unpleasant sacrifices on people - less holidays, less kids, smaller cars, less meat, less stuff - will get voted out.

Less dogs even - a large dog is a similar impact
to a Range Rover and then there’s all the extra stuff that seems to be essential nowadays for your pet

People just don’t want to do any sacrifices themselves.

YABU to suggest people use trains more OP. Would love to, but they’re far too expensive for most families to travel that way.

We are consumers, and we are conditioned to consuming as - another poster put it - the system we exist in is set up to enable us to continue consuming. Until this fundamentally changes, an individual cannot really make much of a difference, although you can do your bit to help in whatever way you think is best. China and the US need to lead the way as well - the collective carbon footprints of these countries far far outweighs ours, and we won't address the need for change until they make their moves. Because.........well what's the point? We could try and make changes here but for a real difference to be made we really do need collective action from these two countries and the way things are going, I actually think they're heading in the opposite direction - more output, more capitalism and more consumption.

It's not a good look