Why is climate change not a bigger election issue?

[ChedderGorgeous]

Forget tax on private schools, it is going to be 43 degrees in Athens today, over 40 on Greek Islands in last week: huge risk of wildfires. The UK regularly floods due to unnaturally high rainfall , which gives water companies the excuse to pump raw rewage into rivers and beaches. Where is Starmer on this one ? Too busy smashing the gangs ?

https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/59233799

It takes about 30 seconds to Google "State subsidies for fossil fuels" and come up with pages and pages of results 🙄

Not sure if you have noticed but your emoji button is broken.

In any case, what is your point? What do you want people on this tiny, increasingly inconsequential, island to do to stop Russia and Iran from subsidizing their oil industries? Attack them with a paper straw?

Again, it takes literally 30 seconds to Google "Are EVs better for the environment?" and get pages and pages of results, all saying the same thing, like this study from Cambridge University. Do you have a deliberate interest in spreading misinformation, or are you just thick? https://www.cam.ac.uk/research/news/electric-cars-better-for-climate-in-95-of-the-world

Do you have a deliberate interest in spreading misinformation?

Your quote button is also broken. You keep quoting the wrong post.

My point is that you are spreading misinformation. You are making assertions that are provably untrue. This isn't even obscure stuff- as I pointed out, a 30 second Google will provide a huge amount of information from very reputable sources that what you are saying is untrue. So. Why are you doing it?

What misinformation?

Mmmmm...we're not really allowed to say that. Besides, I did an AS on them and, although objectionable, they post a lot on a variety of subjects, so 🤷‍♀️

Thick? Are you a twat? Why not engage properly?

Yes, if you google that I have no doubt those are precisely the articles that google will give you, it's not what I would call an unbiased search engine by any means.

You've also asked the question is a way that isn't that helpful. Better than what? By what measure? It's not just about comparing emissions to conventional vehicles.Which is what a lot of studies do, unfortunately. They leave out other environmental questions and also the effectiveness of the vehicles. And they don't ask whether emissions are really lessened enough to make a difference either, which is a pretty important point.

It's really not as cut and dried as you think. The mining issue is really significant.

You don't need to buy new stuff to help the planet.

The absolute best way to help the planet is just to consume less stuff

Any links to support that? Because otherwise it just sounds like malicious misinformation. Again.

Do feel free to tell me which magically unbiased search engine you use to glean your high quality data then 😆

As a matter of fact, I used "Google" as a colloquialism, but the search engine on my phone is Ecosia.

Actually - I think this discussion exemplifies really clearly why conservatives over time have kind of come to ignore many on the left on this. When they ask reasonable and practical questions about what policies and direction are best - about things like how to actually get out of an oil driven economy without collapsing it - or they question the supposed scientific or engineering solutions - they are accused of being antis, or thick, or selfish, or something else.

It makes it seem at best a fruitless discussion, and in many ways like the activists don't want real solutions only the appearance of them.

You are not "questioning" anything. You are deliberately spreading misinformation when good quality sources of data are readily available. My only question is: malice or ignorance?

It’s called making a logical argument. Something you have so far failed to do. You still haven’t pointed out the misinformation yet.

Indeed, an excellent example of what I said. No engagement at all, just nastiness.

Weirdly you see this behaviour across many issues. It's a huge problem among political progressives. They don't seem to see at all how poor the outcomes are.

I think you are getting muddled by natural shifts in temperature and man made causes of climate change, well documented since the industrial revolution. Keep up your reading!

Most people don't believe in it.

You can't save the world but you can prevent your children and grandchildren from being there at the worst time in history, by not having children.

Don't they? Most people in the UK maybe. Which hasn't started to feel the brunt yet.
But will eventually.

I thought the problem with electric cars was their batteries and generating the huge increase in demand for electricity they'd generate.

https://www.greencars.com/greencars-101/environmental-impact-of-ev-batteries

As I understand it there's a lot of ongoing research into batteries and maybe better rechargeable one - so things may improve in future. Mind you I think there's lot of research going on into aviation fuel as well.

Better public transport would be a good alternative - here buses are electric but they have also had timetables massive cut and fare are high - shockingly so for car driver when told - and that's partly down to cuts in government support.

DH commute is train and electric assist foldable bike - actually not usual on that route - the new rolling stock is good for storage of cases and bikes - but older trains can be difficult with such items.

No. If they truly believed it was happening, they wouldn't keep breeding would they? Or do they just not care if their children have terrifying lives?

Ah. I see. You are one of those.