To find it strange no one is talking about this?

[FruminousBandersnatch]

The latest IPCC report - a result of looking at 6000 climate change studies. It’s horrifying. The world as we know it is going to change so quickly and not enough is being done.

Why is this not being discussed here?

Our best hope is to get off planet and re-colonise ASAP.
the ability to limit our numbers but don't.Good idea Helen

Cock up some other planet as well!

Our governments are ruled by big business - they are looking for infinite economic growth on a finite planet. They don't give a damn about the log-term state of the environment as long as they can continue to collect short-term profits. We KNOW fossil fuels are killing us - but our government tsill gives the go ahead for fracking (known to damage the environment additint to being a method to access shale gas - a fossil fuel that WE NEED TO STOP BURNING) - Why? Because they , as individuals, are getting huge profits from it. And it is the same with the weapons industry.

There are too may people. We have the means to limit our numbers, but don't - though e are happy to cull any and every othe r species.

In the first world our consumption and waste is shocking - but it is the third world that pays for our excess. And we complain aboutthe growth of India and China - but why shouldn't the people there have a decent standard of living, too?

We are a greedy, wasteful species. We don't deserve this, or any other planet.

Sorry - don't know how i got a random half sentence at the beginning.

I believe this report.
Unlike the most excellent Australia government who has decided to double down on coal mining and coal fired power stations in the face of the report.
This is a global problem at a time when global relationships aren't even vaguely harmonious. The West can't preach overpopulation till it slows it's consumption levels and that will take government intervention.
Governments are only interested in hanging onto power and their seats - there is no real long term planning going on. The economic modelling of growth at all costs is like a locked on barnacle in Australia.
I think we'll see more extreme weather events , and maybe a water war before most governments get their heads out of their asses.
And even then how will compliance be enforced?

I can fanny about with my reusable coffee cup, and my not plastic bags as much as I like but it will achieve very, very little.

This is what all governments should be prioritising, and since it's not popular, won't make money and doesn't play well with votes fuck all will happen.
It's extremely worrying.

Geranium, thank you for the recommendation. We have tried the Whole Earth peanut butter and were not that keen. We have tried the ones without palm oil - there are not many of them, and haven't really liked any of them. At the moment we are not buying any and are thinking about making our own.

I think it’s too late and we’re doomed as a species. Cutting down on a personal level has practically no impact and unless drastic global steps are taken then we don’t have any hope.

Not read the full thread but every individuals actions count.

Starting with reducing consumption,( I'm horrified how much waste we personally create in our house)
Composting fruit/veg peelings
Beeswax wrap for sandwiches egg
Buy a metal water bottle
Opt for your electric to use green sources
Use your democratic power and bite for a party who care about the environment
Boycott companies who aren't taking this seriously - money talks!

Our society is built on consuming and when people consume less we go into recession! That needs to be addressed. We could invest heavily in more research into alternative technology and choose to be world leading. Sadly we have opted to spend the last two years squabbling over Brexit with goodness knows what long term damage that will do.

Our children and grandchildren will look back at our selfishness and the way we live our lives in horror as they deal with the fallout.

Money really is the cause of so many of the problems. People are so busy they days with the hours they work (to earn enough money to live) that they cut corners with confidence food, use Amazon prime to order stuff and drive more than walk as it's quicker. I'm guilty of all of these things.

But after that early morning ramble - change really does start with an individual!!

This Rebecca Solnit piece is a voice of hope to anyone despairing over this:

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2018/oct/14/climate-change-taking-action-rebecca-solnit

Relying on technology that hasn't been invented yet is risky, BUT as she points out, small groups of determined people and driven individuals have shaped history.

We have changed and are changing our personal and public habits to deal with the theefects of climate change. However, there are serious drawbacks to the whole green climate change movement.

Firstly, the lobby is trying to create and succeeding in generating hysteria evidenced by the posts on this page. Ill informed individuals who know nothing about the evidence and its actual status are calling for extreme measures. Many of these measures are also ill thought out.

Secondly, business, governrnments and institutions are hijacking people’s ill informed fears either to make money out of the public such as the green energy scandal which is robbing domestic fuel consumers or to enforce authoritarian measures. The lobby is also creating a nasty climate of intimidation towards those who question the evidence.

Thirdly, any measure a small country makes towards less wasteful policies is negated and dwarfed but the huge pollution produced by emerging and less mature economies. Green measures are opposed to industrial development and non western governments often choose to take their people out of poverty and starvation rather than take long term decisions to save the planet. What can giving up plastic straws - a good measure in itself - do to counter the fact that China is opening a new coal fired power station a month? Do those who ‘know’ about climate change also know that a couple of Far Eastern rivers alone account for 80 per cent of the world’s river pollution. I think virtue signalling, anti racist views might counter voicing these concerns. Who today can say, it’s not ‘us’, it’s ‘them’?

Additionally, many of those who like to make a song and dance about gestures such as giving up plastic coffee containers would hesitate to take on the measures that would truly make a real difference. Would they limit their families to one child, give up pets, endure power blackouts and curfews, stop taking holidays (especially with flights, or even worse, long haul flights), give up festivals, night clubs and night entertainments, endure a limited diet and so on?

Green measures and human freedom are mutually inimical. I hardly trust this and other governments to make decisions about whether or not bananas should be straight or curved. To entrust them with our very freedom and happiness seems like the height of folly. The green movement is very like Marxism in its aims and methods and, to my mind, best resisted as the greater of two evils.

Sorry, ‘the facts of climate change...’

It’s not spoken about much as people would go into a mad panic. It’s all too late. Or is it ? remember when they thought the computer systems would go into melt down or be a virus at midnight 20000 ? The only millennium virus we got was that damn flu !

The Y2K bug was real, a huge amount of time and money was spent by business (and government depts) to fix it, because they're very much reliant on computer systems and there was a hard stop date that was impossible to avoid. There was also a fairly simple set of scenarios to test for to prove whether the bug was fixed, and if a company didn't fix their own systems, no-one else was going to do it for them.

Climate change is very different, as it's a collective responsibility, with no hard and fast dates, changes, tests etc.

@teacher22

Lol. Hope you aren’t teaching one of my children.

I haven't had kids - probably does more to halt climate change than anything else I could possibly do.. However it is because I don't want them for other reasons.

Apart from that, I'm 42 and will be dead before the worst of it happens.

So I'll continue to drive my car, go on long haul holidays, heat my house and live for my convenience in the knowledge it isn't my problem.

bump.

Teacher22, do you consider it's better to just let it happen in order to avoid collectivism/socialism/communism?

@whatdoesitmatteranyway that is sad you feel like that. I am glad to say I know plenty of other child free people who care deeply. But humans are selfish creatures and I’m not at all shocked that plenty don’t.

I'm not long back from Florida and was horrified by how little regard they have for the environment where we stayed. There was one bin in the house for everything, not one single thing was recycled. It was expected that you emptied the bin daily into a container outside your front door and this was collected every single morning by a truck. This was in an estate with hundreds of houses in it. Pure convenience for those living and holidaying there with no regard for what was to happen to the rubbish. There was no information available about where we could even take anything to recycle it. In addition there was zero public transport. I didnt see a single train station, we had to drive absolutely everywhere and the roads were chocablock. It made me grateful that in the UK there is at least a modicum of concern about the environmental impact of our lives.

We do try to create as little waste as possible and reduce, reuse, recycle. It probably makes little difference but like the saying goes 'be the change you want to see in the world'. I worry so much for my children's future, for many reasons, but this is the main one. I'd like to be able to tell them we did what we could for their world.

Well having children is a very un-environmentally friendly thing to do so I assume all of you worrying don't have kids? I don't.

But if everyone in the western world stopped having kids because of the environmental impact, where would we be? That's hardly the answer!

A conscientious family of five could quite easily consume less and do less damage to the world than a wasteful, uncaring family of two, with the added benefit of those children growing up to be heart surgeons, care assistants, etc. The birth rate in Scotland is falling, I really don't accept that having two kids is somehow responsible for the downfall of the planet...

@whatdoesitmatteranyway your comment sums up almost everything that is wrong with the current situation. Yes over population is a big elephant in the room. People really don't want to talk about it. I have 2 kids. I'll be honest with you, I didn't realise when I had them quite how massive the impact was. But every person can do something and it really doesn't have to completely change your lifestyle. Eat less meat, consider spending a bit more on foods that have been ethically produced, recycle, pick up rubbish if you see it on the beach, wear a jumper and properly insulate your house rather than whacking your heating up to 22 and sitting in your t-shirt in December, walk, cycle or take public transport if you are going somewhere local. Offer car shares for work if you can. All of these are fairly small things and they all make a difference.
An inability to care for the communities around us will be our downfall. I feel deeply sad that you are so clearly missing empathy and conscience in your life.

The world wouldn't end if people stopped having children. Species die out all of the time.

People buying loads of clothes is an issue too. Loads of people at work seem to have dozens and dozens of different outfits. No need for it. All cheap tat too probably and made for slave wages.

Well having children is a very un-environmentally friendly thing to do so I assume all of you worrying don't have kids? I don't.

This is overly simplistic and has been discussed at length on the “they have no clean water...” thread and touched on here a few times by me and some others.

But if you want to pare it back to the bare bones of the argument, you’re absolutely right; having a child is bad for the environment, as it’s an additional human being. Humans existing at all is very environmentally unfriendly. Especially so in this country as we consume so much. If you read back through the thread, we’ve been discussing exactly this. Every human life leaves its mark on the planet. There is no way to live without doing some harm.

There is a group which encourages people to stop having children and they seek to bring about the end of humanity so ‘Gaia’ can thrive without us. It’s ‘a thing’. I forget what they’re called though.

I rather like humans though, so I’d rather we didn’t die out all that soon.

I think in the future we will see one child or two child policies though. And I don’t actually think as many people as you might think would be very resistant to this. Younger generations are better educated about this, thankfully. That doesn’t mean have no children necessarily, but I do think people having larger families might be a thing of the past.

There is also an argument that the problem isn’t births, it’s that we’re living too long. I think euthanasia, (as unpalatable as the conversation is), will be made more available in the future too.

And, it’s facetious to say we aren’t allowed to have an opinion on environment issues if we have children. Is that really what you were implying?

Especially so in this country as we consume so much

And, (for me), this^ is the crux of the matter. If, like me, you want the human race to continue, (and I know there are plenty of people who would rather we didn’t, so Gaia could thrive etc), we can’t stop people having children altogether. But we could reduce the numbers and, crucially^, lower consumption per person.

whatdoesitmatteranyway, what a sad and selfish attitude.

As I said, me and DH don't have children by choice but we are still worried about the future for our nieces, nephews, friends' children and just children in general.

Lots of people just bury their head in the sand although certainly anyone with children should be worried about the future. Most people just don't want to know about overpopulation though or argue that we are not overpopulated.

For every couple deciding to have no children or just 1 or 2 there are many have 3, 4 or more. Families seem to be growing larger (at least where I live in the UK).

I know when there have been discussions about the Radford family I have been amazed at just how many people, on here and other discussions forums, say they have 5, 6, 7 children. Quite a few have more than that. I just think it is very selfish

Families seem to be growing larger (at least where I live in the UK).

That’s worrying. I’m in the SE of England and cost of housing here seems to make having larger families unviable financially for many people I know. The only friend I have with more than two children had twins in her second pregnancy, so she didn’t ‘choose’ to have three.

I do worry though, that some people now see large families as a status symbol or badge of honour, because it’s out of so many people’s reach financially.