COP 26

Great joke, shame it's not true! That's Falsebook for you

 

How old are the records ?

 

Yes it's a joke but in reality, Greta is asking the impossible from nations at the same time as not practicing what she is preaching.

 

Or Australia.

 

Sorry but I’ve looked and as far as I can see Greta pretty much does practice what she preaches. I’m sure she’s not perfect but it seems by and large she sticks to her principles. If anyone has a genuine picture of her getting into a Lear Jet, throwing a plastic bottle out of a car window or burning a pile of tyres in the back garden I’d be interested to see it

 

How much is the carbon footprint of one person roughly ?

 

Depends what you mean, enough to keep us all going and reduce the impact on the planet...I think it is suggested that about 5 tonnes a year would work.
Figures differ depending where you look but
Average UK is about 12
Average US is about 19
Average world about 4


Just as an afterthought, this is a good site with a free calculator to figure out what you use https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

 

I might have given her more credibility if her second name wasn't Tintin!

 

30 years ago

 

Interesting site Chris, I came up at 9.15 Tonnes.

House = 2,49
Flights = 0.52
Car = 3.3
Bike = 0.43
Bus & Rail = 0
Secondary = 2.37

Conclusions

The house is high because I use heating oil and burn wood/coal on a multifuel stove, difficult and expensive to change.
The flight is based on one trip to Europe per year, surely that's not excessive
I could drop my car down to 1.8 if I did 10% less miles and swithched from a 3 litre to a 2 litre
My bike is not negotiable Greta!
I'm not damaging the environment bu using buses
I think my secondary is quite modest

 

I agree it's tough. I'm no eco warrier and with no kids I could just ignoreit all and say something rude, but the filters will get me, but you know what I mean.

However, it's been eye opening looking at what it actually means for us as individuals.

I'm off to France in a holiday in March, flight is the obvious choice, but I looked at trains, swore a lot because if the archaic systems, but eventually found a site (Raileurope) that helps and found a train that is cheaper, a tiny fraction of the carbon, more leg room and much more fun....but takes longer. But I'm going that way as I'm playing a game with myself to see what is a reasonable adjustment and what I'll say sod it too

 

I would use trains a lot more if they were run properly like they are elsewhere. At home, without mentioning the dirty carriages, rubbish facilities at outdated stations and poor timetables, they are just too flippin' expensive!

 

I only drive about 20 miles per week in the 1.4 polo. Don't fly anymore. Dishwasher broke not replaced, save on electricity and water use. Gardens front and back are planted with native trees and hedges and lots of plants, so contributing to my carbon offset.

Gas boiler heating, small house so use is quite low and boiler is modern and efficient. House modern and well insulated.

Eating less beans so reducing my methane emissions. Given up eating meat.

Don't think I can do much more.

 

We went to Cromer for the day and thought about using the train. My nearest bus stop is 10 miles away so I'd have to drive to Peterborough satation, pay £15 to park and then £44 each for the train. I ended up driving, it cost around £25!

 

I agree trains are stupidly prices here. I lso agree Paul, one flight to Europe is not excessive.

@mgbman,. Oops you just made me realise that as a veggie, I'm my own methane factory

 

Good man - of course it's easier for us retired folk living simple lives, but here's mine...
I no longer drive anywhere, never fly, do not use buses or trains, never go anywhere on the boat, heat it with solid fuel, cook with propane and don't use much electric, but I DO know very accurately how much of all these I use.
1.01 tonne for two of us - 0.5 tonne each. Well below world average and 1/20th UK average - not bad eh?
Makes me larf to read of concern for the planet from people with CFP 20x mine or more. We seem to be in love with heating and cooling our home micro-climates, when I was a nipper people expected to be cold in the winter and hot in the summer and worked within push bike distance from home. Many didn't have cars, now we expect one, two, or three EACH! The west is bonkers.
I did have my time of extravagance though - crappy old boiler on full power 24/7 - lots of cars etc though not much mileage, mostly worked at home, never flew. If I lived again, I doubt that would change.
Generally I do not approve of cheap flying.

 

This is the problem that has to be addressed - we have to make train and buses cheap and accessible to get people out of cars.
The only way to do this is to nationalise it and accept it as a public service that will need significant public subsidy and will never make money. That's why it will never be addressed.....

Instead we will all be 'pursuaded' to buy our own electric cars, and drive around much like today, single occupancy journeys.......

 

We just don't have the capacity for everyone to use public transport, trains are a joke. Maybe with all the deliveries going on these days there is a chance people's personal mileages will go down, but probably we'll just buy more stuff and carry on as usual. There is a huge housing related problem that convenient transport has allowed house prices to soar - hardly anyone can afford to live where they have to work to be able to afford to live in even a cheaper place. Commuting is mental, the amount of cars on the road 24/7 is mental. Up here the rush hour starts at 6am and lasts 14 hours!

 

We don't need to have capacity for everyone to use public transport, just more availability for those willing to switch and also availability to reach suburban and semi rural communities - that could be on-demand, subsidised taxis or mini buses.

There is already the basis of railway infrastructure available - a lot of 'new' railway routes use those originally axed by Beeching in the 1960's (Eg the new East West line relinking Oxford and Cambridge uses the route of the old Varsity Line)

I worked for John Laing when they owned Chiltern Railways, they delivered Project Evergreen which addressed the issue of under capacity of platform space by constructing a modular span system to extend the platforms, which then accommodated larger numbers of carriages. Anyone who has used London Marylebone will know that the capacity has virtually doubled in 15 years, using the same footprint by utilising the old sidings and depot space.

I've also attended a bus transport passenger forum for Buckinghamshire as my sons' school bus service was axed by the Bucks County Council.
He had to use the public bus service operated by one of the big bus operators - it was shocking, in terms of lateness and cancellations.
They actually admitted that they didn't have enough buses and a very limited number of bus depots and maintenance facilities and also admitted that they adjust the times and routes of services for their own benefit. In one example a route popular with pensioners to go into the town centre had a few stops taken out, so they either had to walk to the nearest stop, or get a taxi instead. They got taxis instead......so the next service review would identify a reduction in passenger numbers and edge it towards being axed.

When you dig a bit deeper and actually make some effort to attend public meetings you find out lots of hidden detail about privatised public transport services - for example, the operator's performance was only monitored by the Council on a couple of key routes at key times, so they would focus their service delivery on those routes at those times to artificially inflate their performance indicators!

 

Having working in the railway dealing with the government for the past 12 years; the issue IMHO is that the policy in England is to make the user pay and not society and get private companies to do the work so the government does not carry the debt on the books. Whereas elsewhere, the value of the service, the linking of small communities means those governments subsidise the rail/bus etc more highly. We on the other hand reduce the subsidies and so the ticket prices are high, the use is lower in rural areas and the benefits of social cohesion are not overly valued in the equation when the government looks at transport policy.