Meet the Other Phone. Protection built in.

Meet the Other Phone.
Protection built in.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

AIBU to be terrified by what David Attenborough has said?

416 replies

ArcheryAnnie · 04/12/2018 00:16

He's just said about climate change ""if we don't take action, the collapse of our civilisations and the extinction of much of the natural world is on the horizon." He's not the only one saying this - it's now common currency amongst scientists, and indeed anyone paying attention.

www.theage.com.au/world/europe/civilisation-may-collapse-if-climate-change-ignored-attenborough-20181204-p50jzs.html?platform=hootsuite

There's no time left for pissing about. We've got to take radical action now. It isn't something that any of us can ignore.

OP posts:
jillytots · 04/12/2018 12:43

But they will continue to do so while train travel costs so much more for a long distance than flying

Well exactly, this is one thing that is completely ludicrous, why is it so fucking cheap? I'm planning a trip to Edinburgh soon and flying is way cheaper than catching a train and yet train takes 3x less the time.

ChardonnaysPrettySister · 04/12/2018 12:47

Well exactly, this is one thing that is completely ludicrous, why is it so fucking cheap? I'm planning a trip to Edinburgh soon and flying is way cheaper than catching a train and yet train takes 3x less the time.

Aviation fuel is not taxed. That's why it's cheap to fly, because we all help subsidy the airlines.

Augusta2012 · 04/12/2018 12:49

If we dealt with the problem of overpopulation then climate change would take care of itself to some extent. This is a problem for the 3rd world though, not the west. We need to improve access to contraception and incentivise smaller families.

DisrespectfulAdultFemale · 04/12/2018 12:51

Train vs airplane travel is an interesting point: it seems that while people are concerned about climate change many are not willing to make changes if it costs them more.

By the time we accept that the long-term costs to the planet will mean making financial sacrifices, the long-term costs to the planet it will be too late. There's no point blaming politicians if the population won't make voluntary changes.

LaurieFairyCake · 04/12/2018 12:52

Adulthumanfemale

You're quite right, I mean judging appropriately - so not automatically assuming that someone flying to the Maldives is worse than someone who had 4 kids and has gone to Disney Paris 3 times Grin

jillytots · 04/12/2018 12:52

Then you move in pretty selfish and narrow social circles w

Oh come on, you don't think flying somewhere on holiday is the norm? Really? You think a small family who have saved up their money to go on a holiday turkey are a bunch of selfish cunts? Or is it more realistic that as I said earlier, they are just living their life and the mainstream message is that flying is ok. It's part of modern life. That is the mainstream message.

Ilikeviognier · 04/12/2018 12:52

Yep. It’s terifying. I have 2 small kids and I’m scared for them. Not for myself- I’ll be dead by then. I think it’s terrible what we’ve done and how we’ve fucked to the planet. Yet I can’t see the leaders doing what David A has said. 😳

Isn’t the conference sponsored by a coal company too? I mean wtf.

MarshaBradyo · 04/12/2018 12:56

Which companies will make the changes needed?
We still get glowing reports on R4 with easyJet profit up, Thomas Cook bad it’s down - CEO proud or defending

No story on who has changed their company to green - I’m sure some do?

Journalists and the media should be doing more on this - they still celebrate consuming in many ways

LonelyandTiredandLow · 04/12/2018 12:56

I think the train costs are a red herring - I suspect people wouldn't mind paying the increase for train fairs if they received a good service and some of the money went into something green. The fact they are cancelled for minor issues, timetables messed about with and services cut while prices rise is more about our seemingly endless obsession with allowing big business to ring us dry for profit while dropping their tax.

AdultHumanFemale · 04/12/2018 12:59

Urgh, Laurie , I am sorry, that reference to the Maldives is a complete coincidence. I picked the Maldives as that is one long haul destination I am sure no MNing RL friends or acquaintances are going to, so as not to out myself. But this is a perfect illustration of this whole issue; having enjoyed your company on MN for years, I think you seem like a lovely person, and I want you to have a lovely time in your life, and normally would never question any decisions you made if you were my RL friend. But I think this will change as the conversation about climate change broadens into the mainstream.
I did enough long hauling in my free-wheeling hippie 20s to make me want to weep with hindsight, so not beyond reproach.

TeacupDrama · 04/12/2018 13:00

a lot of people can't afford the luxury of paying substantially more
recently I needed to go to a funeral in Kent I live near glasgow

train from glasgow to ashford kent £210 would need 2 nights away from home due to timetabling
plane from glasgow to Gatwick £72; for both methods my DH would drive me to glasgow and my sister would pick me up at other end we would stay with friends I could not pay 3X the price to travel by train for it to take so much longer and need 3 days off instead of 2, funerals normally just 7 days notice it is not like you can book weeks in advance, also the train time was over 7 hours as opposed to 80 minutes flight

LonelyandTiredandLow · 04/12/2018 13:01

I'd like to also say I'm on Octopus Energy which has been brilliant - I pay less, get a breakdown of where our green energy comes from and the people on the phone don't sound like they would rather chop off their ear than pick up another angry customer call (if you follow this link to sign up I might win an electric car, which would be lovely!) Octopus link. It's definately worth checking out Smile. Smal changes and what we individually choose to switch to will make the big businesses sit up and take note.

ChardonnaysPrettySister · 04/12/2018 13:09

Airplane fuel must be taxed, if we are serious about this.

LegoAdventCalendar · 04/12/2018 13:17

Exactly, Teacup! A lot of these 'go green' measures cost most, at a time when wages are stagnant or falling, jobs are less secure (zero hours, temp contracts) and more and more are losing tax credits and being moved onto UC.

AlaskanOilBaron · 04/12/2018 13:23

What a farce that jet fuel isn’t taxed.

How can we make this plastic island 2.0?

LaurieFairyCake · 04/12/2018 13:31

I'M not going to the Maldives (though I'm sure it's lovely) Grin

Someone has posted on the long haul board saying they're going

But if I was to go I've not flown in 15 years so I would be being less environmentally damaging than someone like you who has possibly flown all over when younger (NOT judging)

I think this is why I'm sort of banging on about individual responsibility

If we all knew we were allowed one child or one long haul flight or 3 short hauls, or one car every ten years maybe we WOULD consider our choices?

I have no idea, I know I would - but that's cos I'm a smug no-bio child, no car, almost vegan twat Grin

SchadenfreudePersonified · 04/12/2018 13:38

He's not the only one saying this - it's now common currency amongst scientists, and indeed anyone paying attention.

It's been common currency among scientists for nearly FIFTY years - politicians have hidden and obfuscated the data in return for votes from the population (throw us bread and circuses and we don't give a damn) and kickbacks from the big fossil fuel companies.

If we had put half of the effort into finding alternative methods of producing energy, as we have into killing each other with more and more advanced weapons, then this planet would be a better place for everything on it.

Most of Europe woke up a long while ago, but pressure from the big fossil fuel producers (Middle East, US) paralysed a great deal of action. The US produces over a third of the world's greenhouse gases and refuses to even attempt to make any effective changes. India and China, as emerging economies (quite rightly) want a decent standard of living for their citizens - but that can only be achieved if we in the west agree to reduce ours - it wouldn't really take much to level everything out. As a PP said - eat less meat, don't waste so much stuff (of all types), accept that we don't NEED huge cars, hot-tubs, a TV in every room etc.

But we won't accept it. The good times are over, it's all downhill from now on - and sadly, we are taking every other lifeform on this planet with us. (Except perhaps cockroaches - doesn't that warm the cockles of your heart!?)

kikisparks · 04/12/2018 13:40

Meat and animal products absolutely are an issue according to a lot of unbiased peer reviewed research.

“Pasture raised” is just as bad according to the Food Climate Research Network:

“This report concludes that grass-fed livestock are not a climate solution. Grazing livestock are net contributors to the climate problem, as are all livestock. Rising animal production and consumption, whatever the farming system and animal type, is causing damaging greenhouse gas release and contributing to changes in land use. Ultimately, if high consuming individuals and countries want to do something positive for the climate, maintaining their current consumption levels but simply switching to grass-fed beef is not a solution. Eating less meat, of all types, is.”

The WWF on the impact of feed crops for animals

www.wwf.org.uk/sites/default/files/2017-10/WWF_AppetiteForDestruction_Summary_Report_SignOff.pdf

Includes information on soya:

“Today, protein-rich soy is such an important feed ingredient that the average European consumes approximately 61kg of soy per year, largely indirectly through the animal products that they eat like chicken, pork, salmon, cheese, milk and eggs. In 2010, the British livestock industry needed an area the size of Yorkshire to produce the soy used in feed. “

citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/download?doi=10.1.1.511.7351&rep=rep1&type=pdf

“Much of the estimated 35% of global greenhouse-gas emissions deriving from agriculture and land use35 comes from livestock production. Livestock production—including deforestation for grazing land and soy-feed production, soil carbon loss in grazing lands, the energy used in growing feed-grains and in processing and transporting grains and meat, nitrous oxide releases from the use of nitrogenous fertilisers, and gases from animal manure (especially methane) and enteric fermentation44—accounts for about 18% of global greenhouse-gas emissions (figure 2).42 This estimate consists of around 9% of global emissions of carbon dioxide, plus 35–40% of methane emissions and 65% of nitrous oxide, both of which have much greater near-term warming potential over several ensuing decades than does carbon doxide (although they have shorter half-lives in the atmosphere). Similar estimates exist of the contributions of UK farming, live-stock production, and the food chain overall, to national greenhouse-gas emissions.45

Health professionals warn that the use of antibiotics early on in the food chain, with farmers administering drugs to animals to promote growth rather than treat disease, is a particular problem”

kikisparks · 04/12/2018 13:41

Missed the link to FCRN report www.fcrn.org.uk/projects/grazed-and-confused

OnlineAlienator · 04/12/2018 13:44

A lot of the anti meat studies are irrelevant bollocks, quite soundly debunked by those in the know. Crop production is as bad. Its a red herring academia, the press and big biz loves.

SchadenfreudePersonified · 04/12/2018 13:44

If we all knew we were allowed one child or one long haul flight or 3 short hauls, or one car every ten years maybe we WOULD consider our choices?

Fairycake is right. We really have to learn to accept that we can't have everything we want - we don't have a RIGHT to all of the resources on the planet, and adding to an already massive population isn't helping - either us, the planet, or our children who are going to be struggling to survive with a couple of generations.

Even if we stopped adding extra gases TODAY, the momentum of what is currently in the atmosphere, and which is causing more to be released, will take a long time to slow and stop - it would be centuries - possibly millennia before there will be any reversal.

As the prophecy goes: When the last tree has been cut down, the last fish caught, the last river poisoned, only then will we realize that one cannot eat money.

NoSpend19 · 04/12/2018 13:55

Its scary and worrying. This time of year only highlights the needless excessive consumerism.

I'm starting No Spend 19 in January. I want to show the Dc that most of what we buy isn't actually necessary.

LonelyandTiredandLow · 04/12/2018 14:03

sometimes it's not that obvious what is right or wrong

grumiosmum · 04/12/2018 14:13

OnlineAlienator please could you provide a reliable source or link for this assertion?

LegoAdventCalendar · 04/12/2018 14:14

These threads always go round in circles finger-pointing at flying and eating meat. But suggest people not reproduce or Logan's run and the pitchforks come out.

Swipe left for the next trending thread