To think that cars are the biggest cause of climate change?

[malificent7]

I didn't learn to drive till I was 30 as I was concerned about the effects of cars on global warming. Everyone thought I was mad...however now that climate change is a hot topic i wonder how many people still feel that driving isn't damaging to the planet?
Then there are the car accidents, roads are an eyesore.
I mean I drive as I live in the country but I kind of hate it too.

I don't know how much driving contributes to overall climate change.

However, it definitely contributes to pollution, illness and deaths at local level and for that reason alone we need to do something about it.

If I were in charge I'd spend billions on cycle lanes and EV charging units (I know batteries are not eco-saints, but EV cars are better than petrol ones).

@justasking111

Volcanic eruptions contribute more to climate change than anything man is doing. Iceland eruption four years worth

Although the flip side is that all the geothermal power means that the only fossil fuel usage is for vehicles. Data centres are a growing industry in Iceland because of the cheap, green power. Similar in Norway for hydropower. (Shame their populations are low and a mere blip of the world)

Where you do things matters.

Raising animals on marginal British farmland unsuituable for crops is far less damaging than industrialised indoor agriculture in parts of the USA or Middle East. British pastoral farming has a wider ecological benefit from the animals' crap in the fields fertilising them and creating habitat that supports a wider food chain of wildlife.

Cotton grown in a naturally suitable environment will have less impact than cotton grown in a dry, irrigated area.

A product made in China will have more impact than the same item made in Europe because of the difference in production standards, energy generation and waste disposal. Not all China's fault; we outsource or manufacturing there because its cheaper and dodges the costs of our higher standards

Most environmental decisions have some kind of trade-off attached to them. Reducing is better than reducing, better than recycling. Most of the best environmental decisions have wider positive consequences anyway. Reducing car use for local journeys tends to be good for fitness for example.

It is worth making personal micro decisions, but the biggest effect is from national policies and international agreements.

@BlueLenka

Why we aren't massively upping RnD is hydrogen transport? cars, lorries, trains, shipping?

We are.
But you need to make the hydrogen somehow. it's either from natural gas with carbon capture- so still burning fossil fuels but capturing the CO2 OR it's electrolysis and you need MORE electricity to make the hydrogen from water than the energy cv you are getting from that hydrogen...the renewable electricity needs to be in excess in order for this to make sense..we don't have the capacity in UK yet..and it's a long journey and a lot of investment is required

No we are not, the UK govt has committed just £30m in hydrogen and Battry RnD (not manufacturing)

Yes the issues you raise are at the moment (also the case with EV too) which is why we need to matching countries like Japan or Germany.

Otherwise we will have an extensive network of EV charging stations, whilst the row moves to hydrogen.

@whippetwoman

I misread cars as cats for some reason. I’m glad it’s not cats as I have three of the little furry beasts and I was

"Dogs and cats are responsible for a quarter of the greenhouse gas emissions caused by animal agriculture, according a new study out Wednesday, which adds up to a whopping 64 million tons of carbon-dioxide equivalent emitted in the production of their food."

From google

and something from the independent
www.independent.co.uk/climate-change/opinion/pets-uk-ownership-cats-dogs-carbon-environmental-impact-b1249610.html

Sorry posted to soon.

There have been studies that say that a dog (I suspect depending on breed) has a larger carbon footprint than an SUV.

I've travelled to other countries

No rubbish collection, people burn their domestic waste. Home firs for warmth & cooking

People in all countries building houses & farming on what was once green land, desert or forest

Industry

Aeroplanes, cars, motorbikes, boats, transport

The biggest must be over population ?

Space travel

I understand global climate change is due to industrialisation and our consumer lifestyle choices for manufactured products and food sources plus the use of fossil fuels in all transportation but possible greatest negative impact is in civil and military aviation. Obviously military conflicts and wars equals death and ecological mass destruction by intent.

I believe four nations are possibly responsible for much of the global harm. These nations being USA, India, China and Brazil. The UK is a very high per capita energy intensive nation given its relative small geographical footprint but large per capita ecological footprint. The use of battery power personal transportation is only a better solution if the energy source is generated from new renewable technologies. I don’t believe much of the UK electricity generation is from renewables so therefore the electric car still runs on indirect fossil fuels plus the requirement of much finite rare earths which is mostly currently found and mined in China at great ecological expense for batteries.

Going forward our first world appetite for energy dense lifestyles is possibly not massively sustainable if the majority global poor developing nations also aspire to constantly jetting around post pandemic on inexpensive package tourism and all wish to own and importantly drive cars to American levels of ownership and mileage etc plus consumer spending habits on demand instant gratification remote order via mobile touchscreen for same day to the home delivery logistics etc. All this adds up and allows business people to play with ever bigger toys to travel further from our planet and pollute the space around us too burning excessive fossil fuels to reach these outer parts as with aviation for leisure.

In short we need to moderate our behaviours and yes perhaps the number of people on the planet is not sustainable if we all have high per capita energy and resources footprint without massive rethink on a cooperative global scale and effort. The Maldives etc may yet be survival above water as the Artic Tundra becomes a global transportation route and possibly food production etc.

Think and act marginally greener if possible and not hypocritical like doing a bit of recycling but globe trotting constantly on “ecotourism” saviour mode using as much personal carbon emissions as possible! Go greener not green washing pretence.

I'm a vegan and grow a huge amount of my own food. I don't have a brood of children. But I do have a land cruiser and an old hummer (not in UK) and even though they are thirsty, I don't believe they are murdering polar bears. It's generally the earth mums with 4 kids who smugly bicycle around in my experience. Never mind they made 4 consuming farting little darlings.

Textile production
Industrial farming
Unnecessary crap
Shipping unnecessary crap around the planet
Road freight

I think you'll find all of those are worse than cars

Oh and having kids, of course...

If you get an electric car today and get by on overnight charging you will most likely be on green electricity

If the future is electric cars & electric public transport

All new property should have solar panels

Roads & pavements can have solar or electric generating panels installed

Where is all the extra electricity going to be created from, because renewable energy will not supply all the need

The uk had already seen a massive shift in electric generation

We now produce half the carbon per unit of electricity that we did 10 years ago

The need to scale demand and continue to reduce reliance on fossils is well understood and is going well

I am not working for national grid!

The availablity of car batteries actually helps as cars are parked up 90% of the time

That's the easy bit

Renewable plus base of nuclear plus car and giga battery storage works

China depends heavily on coal to generate electricity

"China" is what Americans say to derail criticisms of themselves. The last time I checked China had comparable per-capita emissions to many respectable European countries.

USA and (surprisingly) Japan were much worse than China.

I believe four nations are possibly responsible for much of the global harm. These nations being USA, India, China and Brazil.

Countries should not be in anyone's shit-list because they happen to be big. Put another way, people should not be expected to consume less than people in other countries because they happen to be in a big country.

All countries need to tighten up, but it is per-capita emissions that should be the measure. On that measure, China is not an exceptional country, but USA and Japan are countries that need to do more than others.

It was a while ago that I looked at data, so if my memories of the figures for per-capita emissions are wrong, I'm happy to be corrected.

Mobile phones & internet/ communications infrastructure takes lots of energy, resources & manpower to maintain, repair, upgrade

Not all data centres are based in Iceland with renewable energy or under sea

Streaming tv is terrible for the environment

Overpopulation.

OK, I have just found an up-to-date list of per-capita emissions by country. China is 12th-worst in the list, UK is almost the same at 13th.

So in a list just long enough to include the UK, China is the second best, after the UK.

From worst to less bad, the list is
Saudi Arabia
Australia
USA
Canada
South Korea
Russia
Japan
Germany
South Africa
Polan
Iran
China
United Kingdom

I’m not entirely sure having one manufacturing hub (China) for the world is the best use of fuels.it needs shipping of materials there, then manufacturing, then shipping back to ports around the world, a lorry to another distribution centre and then a van to its final destination.

Then when finished with, the reverse happens for recycling.

@whistlers

Streaming tv is terrible for the environment

Really?

What worse than driving to a cinema ?

Comms / networking including laptops, tv etc is about 3% of total emission

Travel snd transport about 28% of uk emissions

So yeah steaming tv must be dreadful

@SelkieQualia

Our cities are designed around cars. This needs to change; active transport should be given priority.

It's the opposite. The main problem in cities is that they havn't been designed for cars. Most cities were "designed" in the decades/centuries before cars existed. Road systems have been squeezed in to built up areas not really suited to them. Hence the congestion, pollution, etc. Traffic management such as one way systems, pedestrianisation, etc has generally made things worse rather than better. We have huge car parks where access is ridiculously tight via narrow/winding roads etc. Not to mention some very busy one way systems that weave their way round 90 degree sharp corners to wind between buildings. In a lot of towns/cities, a few demolitions would make a massive difference to improving traffic flow thus reducing congestion/pollution, but town planners never do it. They're happy to demolish for shopping centres, car parks, bus stations, etc., but never to re-align a road bottleneck.

Well obviously there is a combination of factors causing it.

On the topic of cars though, it always amazes me how people on here will inform non drivers that their life must be impossible. I don't drive, DH can but doesn't and we have brought up 2 children who are now in their 20s, without a car, no problem at all.

Yes, we do live in London and of course that makes it easier. However, my parents live in a very rural area where I am repeatedly told it is 'impossible' to get by without a car. In fact, there are buses. Not regular and you have to walk or cycle a bit to get to the stops, but they do exist and we regularly visit and stay there (they don't have a car either so we don't rely on them as a taxi service). Also, when we go on holiday we can go where ever we want. With a combination of public transport, cycling or walking we manage just fine, We also keep fit and get closer to the scenery and local people in the process. My children grew up like that, they went to all the same after school clubs and trips and excursions, visited friends etc. and now they are in their 20s they don't drive either (incidentally very few of their friends do either).

The growth of online shopping has made things even easier. Of course there are people who have to drive because of their work, or disability or whatever, however, there are vast numbers of people who really don't need to. And I am getting more and more fed up of having to breathe the awful pollution from cars that people insist they have to have one.