Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
Magneze said:
Nothing. Why would you want to? CO2 is not harmful to man nor beast, you breathe it out.
Jeremy Clarkson Anti-Green Stunt
- Thread starter magneze
- Start date
Nothing. Why would you want to? CO2 is not harmful to man nor beast, you breathe it out.
Surely original article is clearly comparing like with like - the figures *per passenger* for buses compared to the figures *per passenger* for a saloon car. Otherwise the comparison would be meaningless?
On the other hand, lazy journalists making up statistics wouldn't be the biggest shock in the known universe....
Matt
On the other hand, lazy journalists making up statistics wouldn't be the biggest shock in the known universe....
Matt
So you're quite happy for unlimited growth in car usage throughout the world?
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
El Jugador said:
Follow the link on the previous post, there are a couple of cars below even 79.
Lots of people making a good living being environmental doomsayers.
Ice sheet confounds climate theory
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
(Filed: 20/05/2005)
The world's largest ice sheet is growing due to increased snowfall caused by climate change, scientists announce today.
Dating
The study of the east Antarctic ice sheet will be seized on by sceptics to dispute claims made about sea level rises caused by global warming. However, scientists point out that melting glaciers in other regions, especially the smaller but more rapidly changing west Antarctic ice sheet and in Greenland, will more than offset the effects reported today.
The study, described in the journal Science by scientists from the Desert Research Institute and Universities of Missouri and Arizona in America, and Edward Hanna at the University of Sheffield, used satellite measurements to assess the thickness of ice from 1992-2003.
They also used weather forecast models and ice core data to study trends in snowfall during the same period.
Dr Hanna said: "We found that, while the west Antarctic ice sheet was thickening in places and thinning in others, the east Antarctic ice sheet showed significant thickening in many areas, specifically towards the centre.
"This thickening correlated very well with the snowfall modelling, showing that the increased snowfall is causing the ice sheet to grow in mass. We estimate that the ice sheet is holding an extra 45 billion tons of water each year, the equivalent of a sea level drop of 0.12mm a year.
"At the same time, the thinning of the Greenland ice sheet is contributing to a sea level rise of 0.2mm a year. This is being offset to some extent by the sea level drop caused by the thickening of the east Antarctic ice sheet.
"Global warming may mean a moister atmosphere and therefore a wetter climate that increases snowfall on the east Antarctic ice sheet," he said, adding that natural climate variations cannot be ruled out without more data.
I fear we are going over old ground here.
However I would say this. To assume most car users are anti-public-transport is wrong.
Personally (as someone who loves having the freedon of a car) I'm not just pro car but pro *transport*...ie I'd like to see more buses, more trains, more cycle paths etc. The only thing I'm against is anti-car measures like congestion charging. To actually be anti bus is mad, to my way of thinking.
However I would say this. To assume most car users are anti-public-transport is wrong.
Personally (as someone who loves having the freedon of a car) I'm not just pro car but pro *transport*...ie I'd like to see more buses, more trains, more cycle paths etc. The only thing I'm against is anti-car measures like congestion charging. To actually be anti bus is mad, to my way of thinking.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
noodles said:
Those were the ten best, that was why I included the link so people could look up their own vehicle.
Sas - are you aware of the rather bizarre way you are using cars like the Toyota Prius (brought about in part by popular demand by environmentalists) to prove that environmentalists are 'lying fascists'? THe Insight, Prius and others exist precisely because of the demand for low CO2 cars from environmentalists! I should know, we got the Lord Mayor of Oxford to buy one last year.
Matt
Matt
Sasaferrato don't be stupid. Almost anything can be a "pollutant" if there is too much of it. The problem with CO2 isn't that it is toxic, it's that excessive levels alter the atmosphere, increase the greenhouse effect and lead to global warming and climate change. The fact that it is non-toxic is irrelevant.Sasaferrato said:
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
comstock said:
Quite. Public transport is not adequate, especially in rural or semi-rural areas.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
noodles said:
79g per bus passenger, 145 per car. More than one person in a car and it is greener than a bus, on average. Four in a car is twice as green as a bus.
Show me the environmentalist who tells you that. Supression of truth is equivalent to lieing.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
TeeJay said:
Oh yea?
Ice sheet confounds climate theory
By Roger Highfield, Science Editor
(Filed: 20/05/2005)
The world's largest ice sheet is growing due to increased snowfall caused by climate change, scientists announce today.
Dating
The study of the east Antarctic ice sheet will be seized on by sceptics to dispute claims made about sea level rises caused by global warming. However, scientists point out that melting glaciers in other regions, especially the smaller but more rapidly changing west Antarctic ice sheet and in Greenland, will more than offset the effects reported today.
The study, described in the journal Science by scientists from the Desert Research Institute and Universities of Missouri and Arizona in America, and Edward Hanna at the University of Sheffield, used satellite measurements to assess the thickness of ice from 1992-2003.
They also used weather forecast models and ice core data to study trends in snowfall during the same period.
Dr Hanna said: "We found that, while the west Antarctic ice sheet was thickening in places and thinning in others, the east Antarctic ice sheet showed significant thickening in many areas, specifically towards the centre.
"This thickening correlated very well with the snowfall modelling, showing that the increased snowfall is causing the ice sheet to grow in mass. We estimate that the ice sheet is holding an extra 45 billion tons of water each year, the equivalent of a sea level drop of 0.12mm a year.
"At the same time, the thinning of the Greenland ice sheet is contributing to a sea level rise of 0.2mm a year. This is being offset to some extent by the sea level drop caused by the thickening of the east Antarctic ice sheet.
"Global warming may mean a moister atmosphere and therefore a wetter climate that increases snowfall on the east Antarctic ice sheet," he said, adding that natural climate variations cannot be ruled out without more data.
Hardly a ringing endorsement of the eco-fascists is it?
Sasaferrato said:
Um, just scanned that and I may be wrong but....
Sea level drop = 0.12mm/yr
Sea level rise = 0.2mm/yr
Net sea level rise = 0.08mm/yr
Rising sea levels is one of the main detrimental effects of global warming, especially in marginal areas.
But they wouldn't be lying, would they, Sas?
Sasaferrato, climate change could well have all sorts of different effects in different places - some regions might get colder and some warmer, some wetter and some drier. Sea level rise is only one potential risk of chaotic and rapid global climate instability - others include widespread failure of crops and destruction of whole ecosystems, flooding, spread of diseases such as malaria - along with human migration and conflicts in response to these issues.
Even some of the most sceptical oil businesses and right wing politicians are beginning to accept that the risks of continued uncontrolled fossil fuel use are unacceptable, although of course there continues to be a healthy debate about the correct modelling and prediction of climate change, the evaluating costs versus benefits in different scenarios, along with a debate about what alternative technologies and polices to adopt.
Even some of the most sceptical oil businesses and right wing politicians are beginning to accept that the risks of continued uncontrolled fossil fuel use are unacceptable, although of course there continues to be a healthy debate about the correct modelling and prediction of climate change, the evaluating costs versus benefits in different scenarios, along with a debate about what alternative technologies and polices to adopt.
Sasaferrato said:
Well who knows what the truth is - it's not hard to find other sources (like this that paint a rather different picture; here they calculate a CO2 emission per passenger per kilometre of 90g for a bus of 20 people. If that was doubled to 40 people then that's 45g per passenger per kilometre. And I've been on buses that have been much busier than that in the mornings.
FifthFromFront
New Member
Well if we hadn't go rid of our Trolley buses and generated electricity from biomass/wind/tidal/ maybe even nuclear(unconvinced at minute) then there'd be no argument at all.
Trolley buses are fantastic... they accelerate and decelerate so smoothly the ride is one of best going.
FFF
Trolley buses are fantastic... they accelerate and decelerate so smoothly the ride is one of best going.
FFF
Error Gorilla
My spoon is too big
Ah yes. Jeremy Clarkson. Hated son of Doncaster. Once described Rover as 'a bunch of Brummies banging around in a shed.' Popular with people who enjoy Formula 1, slacks and side partings. Bit of a twat.
Although I did enjoy his documentary on Brunel for the Great Britons series in 2002.
Although I did enjoy his documentary on Brunel for the Great Britons series in 2002.
FridgeMagnet
Administrator
There's a lot of nonsense being talked about the statistics here. You get a figure of Xg of CO2 per passenger kilometre by dividing total CO2 emitted by buses / cars by (the number of passengers in buses/cars x the number of kilometres travelled). It's an average, it talks about the relative pollution caused by a mode of transport compared to the amount they are actually achieving, and it takes into account - or *should* take into account if it's properly calculated - how well bus routes are planned, how many passengers each vehicle carries at what time of day, and how polluting the vehicles basically are. You can't use it to calculate how much CO2 an individual car will produce by multiplying the figure by the number of people in the car and the distance travelled. It doesn't work like that.
The point is, assuming the statistics are vaguely accurate (and even if they're not precisely correct, which is likely given how immensely complex the system is, all other evidence seems to point to similar conclusions) the bus network, despite busses being huge inefficient gas guzzlers, carries people around for less pollution. If all car drivers made sure they had four people in the car at all times then their efficiency would go up, which is what car sharing is about. But they don't. So that's the way it is right now.
The point is, assuming the statistics are vaguely accurate (and even if they're not precisely correct, which is likely given how immensely complex the system is, all other evidence seems to point to similar conclusions) the bus network, despite busses being huge inefficient gas guzzlers, carries people around for less pollution. If all car drivers made sure they had four people in the car at all times then their efficiency would go up, which is what car sharing is about. But they don't. So that's the way it is right now.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
_pH_ said:Um, just scanned that and I may be wrong but....
Sea level drop = 0.12mm/yr
Sea level rise = 0.2mm/yr
Net sea level rise = 0.08mm/yr
Rising sea levels is one of the main detrimental effects of global warming, especially in marginal areas.
But they wouldn't be lying, would they, Sas?
Possibly.
( Very sceptical, and becoming more so. )
Awaits next years figures with bated breath.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
FridgeMagnet said:
Per passenger kilometre is what the man said, there is nothing fuzzy about that.
Edited to add:
Clarkson is indeed an irritating twat.
my wife and I for the record really like jeremy clarkson. he's an excellent motoring journalist, and we can't wait for the new series.
anyone who thinks he's a twat takes him far too seriously. watch top gear for what it is, a bit of fun, and an opportunity to watch people drive cars you would never have a hope of owning.
keep up the good work jezza, long may you reign in the motoring world!
anyone who thinks he's a twat takes him far too seriously. watch top gear for what it is, a bit of fun, and an opportunity to watch people drive cars you would never have a hope of owning.
keep up the good work jezza, long may you reign in the motoring world!
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
FifthFromFront said:
Yes indeed. They had them in Hannover when we lived there. The drivers were bloody fierce though, if it was their right of way, they went. I saw one eating a moped ( sans rider.
) one day.
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
_pH_ said:
As I made quite clear on a previous thread, we need to reduce emissions purely on the grounds of air quality, or rather the lack of it. Just because I think that rabid environmentalists should be put out of my misery doesn't mean that I feel that the internal combustion engine should be given unbridled license to shove all sorts of shit into what passes for air nowadays.
CO2 from buses and cars is the least of our worries, micro particulates and the oxides of Nitrogen are what are causing asthma deaths to reach a new peak every year, especially the micro particulates, the major producer of which are diesel bus engines.
FifthFromFront said:
Trolley buses or diesel buses, the problem remains that they can't offer the level of freedom of movement a car can.
Good point about electric power though...if the amount of effort that's gone into developing batteries for mobiles had been put into developing longer life batteries for cars, we'd not be having this dicussion. Even if the electrcity was coming from coal.
FACT. In 1900 petrol and electric cars were more or less neck and neck. If only we'd gone a different 'road' (no pun intended!)
Sasaferrato
Super Refuser!
noodles said:
A bus has just passed my window with one person and the driver in it.
I take your point though. Maybe smaller busses at non busy times would help.
snadge said:I agree, also the services should be improved, where I live if I want to go to my friends house there is one bus a day
Why not both get broadband and get a webcam, or walk half-way each and meet in the middle, or write letters to each other, or move closer, or phone each other, or both buy bicycles. Or get a fucking life and stop moaning about there only being one bus a day. Hey! Why not get that bus and stay over and get the bus back the next day?
