Some content on this page was disabled on March 17, 2025 as a result of a DMCA takedown notice from Guardian Media Group. You can learn more about the DMCA here:
Some content on this page was disabled on March 17, 2025 as a result of a DMCA takedown notice from Guardian Media Group. You can learn more about the DMCA here:
Energy in Demand - Sustainable Energy - Rod Janssen 
“The scientists said their aim in speaking out was to stimulate discussion”. Worthy aim, but who exactly does the “discussing”. The public? I picked this up this week (forgot which media outlet):
Exposure to violent weather events, such as the floods in Spain on Tuesday, may spur support for climate action, but experts warn against overstating the effect. Polling in the aftermath of Australia’s devastating 2019 bushfires found that people who denied the scientific link with climate change were “unmoved” by personal experience of the fire, although overall support for climate action was greater among those affected. A recent UK study found exposure to floods and heatwaves increased acceptance of climate science, particularly among right-leaning voters and climate sceptics, but had a negligible impact on people’s environmental behaviour.
The last line makes the point. Spain – 205 dead, homes wrecked – will it change behaviours? Nope. EVs & transport emission reductions (well the panto season has started so indulge me in a bit of fantasy). The cheapest on the planet come from China (you can buy one for less than €10k). EU reaction to Chinese EVs: 30%++ import tax – because the Euro OEMs (original equipment manufacturers) first made promises on emission reductions that they broke (late 1990s), then lobbied against the cars & Co2 regulation (2008 and mid 2010s) & now are stuffed as their main export market – China – evaporates (Skoda – Chinese sales 2018 – 3050,000, this year, 8000). VW/Audi are now closing factories because……..they sat on their hands for 24 years +++ . We can rinse and repeat on this one. The politicos listening with half of one ear to scientists & then doing nothing. The right whinge (& the fossil Mafiosi) wanting everything to stay as it is. & the politicos folding to threats etc.
This is what “everything stays as it is” looks like: in Spain now 205++ dead people, thousands of destroyed cars, ditto homes and a region wrecked. It is a certainty that next year, exactly the same will happen somewhere else (& note – the somewhere else happened in Italy in Oct – this year).The climate disaster has transformed “weather events” into a randomised lottery. The “luck winners” this year were Valencia and bits of Italy – one wonders who the lucky winners will be next year and the year after that and and and…….this is, the new normal. Political response – nada, zilch, zero. “Stimulate discussion”? ………so that would be ……on what to do when nearly half a metre of rain falls in a couple of hours?
Point: the science on what was going to happen(ish) was known in 1990. Exxon, BP, Shell etc etc all knew. So did the politicos. There could have been a discussion & action could have been taken. Now the only action is that associated with survival and resilience. Don’t live on flood plains (or near rivers), have a big store of water, develop communities that have resilience (energy, food, water, health, transport). Make this mainstream core policy aimed at surviving the rolling disasters. This is pretty much the only discussion to have.
Everything you say is disheartening, but I do think that there is always more one may do. Where I live, I meet people every day who have no idea how climate change works and still think it’s a hoax. So I find that it gives me hope to help them understand the issue if they are interested, and to help my elected representatives understand, too. These are very small actions in the grand scheme of things, but an accumulated tide of very small actions is how we got here. And if WordPress posts are discussions, too, then I think we have shown that the researchers in the Guardian article have sparked a little conversation. They did well to write about the situation and we will do well to stay hopeful and continue to act, if only because it makes one feel that much better.
Sparking a little conversation is what it is about. Thanks to both of you.
Very good points. I think scientists do tread a fine line. In cases like this, where the scientific habit of skepticism and adherence to facts has actually held scientists back from making risks know, and failed to spur societies’ to action, I think that these researchers are doing the right thing.
I fully agree