Hmm, I will have to look into this book further, though a review I have read of the book points out Monbiot, for all his ideals still misses some rather important points.
One noteable issue he fails to address, an issue that was raised in an interesting documentary last year, is that of global dimming. For example, ironically, if you cut back drastically on airline flights as he suggests ( one of the most heavily touted villans by environmentalists, despite the fact air traffic is not one of the major CO2 emitters ) without adressing the much greater contributors to the rising CO2 levels, it is likely that the rate of global warming would increase, not decrease ! Principally because air traffic is responsible in part for the increase in aerosols in the upper atmosphere which reflect back radiation from the sun, thus leading to a cooling effect on the planet.
Yep and it was interesting to note that the first empirical evidence for global dimming came just post Sept 11 2001 when many flights were grounded as a result of that attack.
OF course, contrails are not the only contibutors to global dimming. Industrial pollutants also ad their fair share, so on the one hand industry emits CO2, on the other, it emits pollutants which lead to cooling ( especially in the Northen, industralised hemisphere ) but its by no means benign in its counter effect.
Personally though we can only do small things to reduce CO2, the vast majority of reductions can only be made by industry and government policy, switching from driving a car or motor bike to riding a bicycle will not save the planet sadly.
Re your last point, I already catch public transport, shop at local organic markets, recycle everything I can't reuse and I compost. I understand that this is not enough and that if these ideas are going to be effective, huge amounts of the population need to do them. As you said, industry and government policy needs to be changed and it is for that reason that I am running in State and Local Council elections as a Greens candidate. I know that not everyone can run for office but there are plenty of NGOs as well as poltical parties that people can get involved in.
In a way that is perhaps the best way we can make a difference, by becoming proactive and altering policy, rather than merely "riding a bike" so to speak.
I doubt there are enough people who are that motivated though.:-(
I certainly wish I could compost stuff though...no way to do it living where I do !
The motivation problem comes out of people resigning themselves to be objects of political processes rather than acknowledging that the government are merely highly-paid public servants. Altering policy can be as simple as joining an NGO or a community group in your area and handing out leaflets. That doesn't take much time and it starts raising public awareness of issues.
Indeed. Sadly, there is also these days, an increasing number of people who tend to claim "they just don't have the time" when it comes to such matters, despite the fact they have plenty of time.
Not drive unless necessary, not fly, make sure houses are better insulated, buy fewer new items and items with less packaging. Simply taking your recycling to central sites (on foot or by bike) is better than having it picked up door to door (although my local service uses an electricity powered vehicle for pick-ups). hazeii pointed out that his local council pick up garden waste for composting and other goods for recycling from each house individually. He lives in a rural area, so this is ludicrously wasteful.
Also a lot of items can be reused rather than recycled after a single use.
Paying people to plant trees is not an effective way of producing C02 sinks. If you look at these schemes more closely, they tend to create single-species plantations of trees. These are often not native to the country in which they're being planted and don't provide the species mixture wildlife need.
And even more ludicrous is the example where my parents live in Devon. The main local recycling centre there is about two miles outside of the town in the countryside.
There is no way you can walk there carrying a hefty chunk of recyclables, cycling would be a bit difficult too.
So, one has to drive to deposit anything more than a handful.
I'm no scientific expert, but your claim that air traffic isn't one of the major CO2 emitters seems rather dubious. According to the government's own figures, air transport contributes far more greenhouse gases than any other mode of transport, and its contribution continues to increase (and certainly will if the predictions of a tripling of air-travel by 2030 prove correct). Rail's greenhouse gas contribution is tiny in comparison. Also, air-travel is vastly more fuel-inefficient and polluting per passenger carried than other transport modes, so it seems the obvious place to start in reducing greenhouse emissions.
As for your point about global dimming, surely that's a minor issue in comparison to the overall imperative of reducing atmospheric pollution?
By far the greatest CO2 polluter, well above the levels of the two oft quoted villans of the peace ( cars and planes ) are the buildings and the cities we live in, the actual infrastructure, and the industries that maintain and also build them.
If we all gave up cars and planes, the trend would still be upwards as regards CO2 emissions if we went on building and living in buildings and cities the way we do now.
So yes, while air travel may indeed contribute more CO2 than any other form of transport, transport overall is not the most pressing issue as regards CO".
Global dimming is one of those ironic things, because it is the result of atmospheric pollution churned out by the same industries that also dump more CO2 into the atmosphere.
One noteable issue he fails to address, an issue that was raised in an interesting documentary last year, is that of global dimming. For example, ironically, if you cut back drastically on airline flights as he suggests ( one of the most heavily touted villans by environmentalists, despite the fact air traffic is not one of the major CO2 emitters ) without adressing the much greater contributors to the rising CO2 levels, it is likely that the rate of global warming would increase, not decrease ! Principally because air traffic is responsible in part for the increase in aerosols in the upper atmosphere which reflect back radiation from the sun, thus leading to a cooling effect on the planet.
Reply
Pipistrelle, if not household recycling and planting trees, what can we do to reduce personal CO2 emissions?
Reply
OF course, contrails are not the only contibutors to global dimming. Industrial pollutants also ad their fair share, so on the one hand industry emits CO2, on the other, it emits pollutants which lead to cooling ( especially in the Northen, industralised hemisphere ) but its by no means benign in its counter effect.
Personally though we can only do small things to reduce CO2, the vast majority of reductions can only be made by industry and government policy, switching from driving a car or motor bike to riding a bicycle will not save the planet sadly.
Reply
Reply
I doubt there are enough people who are that motivated though.:-(
I certainly wish I could compost stuff though...no way to do it living where I do !
Reply
Reply
A modern "illness" I suspect.
Reply
Also a lot of items can be reused rather than recycled after a single use.
Paying people to plant trees is not an effective way of producing C02 sinks. If you look at these schemes more closely, they tend to create single-species plantations of trees. These are often not native to the country in which they're being planted and don't provide the species mixture wildlife need.
Reply
There is no way you can walk there carrying a hefty chunk of recyclables, cycling would be a bit difficult too.
So, one has to drive to deposit anything more than a handful.
Reply
As for your point about global dimming, surely that's a minor issue in comparison to the overall imperative of reducing atmospheric pollution?
Reply
If we all gave up cars and planes, the trend would still be upwards as regards CO2 emissions if we went on building and living in buildings and cities the way we do now.
So yes, while air travel may indeed contribute more CO2 than any other form of transport, transport overall is not the most pressing issue as regards CO".
Global dimming is one of those ironic things, because it is the result of atmospheric pollution churned out by the same industries that also dump more CO2 into the atmosphere.
Reply
Leave a comment