Comments on: Should the Government force us to change our lifestyles?

By: David Begum

David Begum — Wed, 12 May 2010 00:56:55 +0000

Incandescent light bulbs will soon be phased out because they waste a lot of energy..*`

By: Emsie cartyo

Emsie cartyo — Mon, 22 Jun 2009 19:48:41 +0000

even though global warming is happening we shouldn’t change our life styles too much just in case it becomes addictive.

we should change it in these following ways;

switch off lights when not in use , to save energy
don’t cut down trees
try to walk or cycle to p;ces instead of using transport, but if you have to, then use public transport because this cuts down on pollution.

have fun with ypur new life styles!

make sure you pay attention to the news about global warming for more ways to help decrease it!!!!!!!

BYE!!!!!!!

By: Adrian

Adrian — Thu, 19 Mar 2009 16:51:25 +0000

Even if you argue that man has nothing to do with climate change (or indeed that it is not even happening) we cannot continue to run our economy on finite resources such as fossil fuels… we must look for alternatives to sustain the may of life we have all become so accostomed to. In the UK we are at the mercy of unstable regimes in far flung corners of the world for approx. 97% of our energy… this is not a healthy state of affairs for a whole host of reasons. If we generate our own energy we can have a stronger, more stable economy than the majority of other countries in the world, with some degree of control on our energy prices and supply.

Is this not a situation that everyone will benifit from?????

By: Robin

Robin — Sat, 27 Dec 2008 17:19:56 +0000

Not even the government take global warming seriously, when they start riding around in electrical operated Wizzes, then I may become a little more greener, (living in the country side, may make this some what hard). What it has helped with, is bring attention to the amount of waste we create, which I’m more than happy to reduce.

Don’t fall for the spin of those with altria motives.

By: Chris

Chris — Fri, 31 Oct 2008 08:34:19 +0000

We need to get the terminology sorted. Climate change is the correct term. The Earth (and other planets in our solar system) have been subject to regular changes in the average temperature for millions of years – a cycle of cooling and warmjing. Always has and always will. At present we are in a warming phase, hence the phrase global warming. The Earth’s climate has been changing through natural means for millions of years. Nobody contests this – scientists accept this as a fact. What is in dispute is the cause. Environmentalists blame man’s burning of fossil fuels adding carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and seem to ignore the natural cycle. The interesting part is looking at temperature data from various sources such as ice cores which indicate temperature over thousands of years. This is before man’s use of hydrocarbons to produce large scale energy (power stations, cars etc.) so carbon dioxide output cannot be blamed for climate change before 1900. Low and behold we have climate change on a regular cycle, the Earth itself and fluctuations in the Sun’s energy output being the cause. Although environmentalists have been banging their drums for a decades, politicians have only become interested recently. I can’t remember the labour party having green issues as any major part of their manifestos back in the 1990′s. No – it’s fashionable and a vote catcher now to back “green issues” – hence the take off/landing tax on flights introduced by Gordon Brown last year. £20 per round trip inside Europe and £40 per round trip intercontinental. So, with a connecting flight to USA or Asia, there’s £60 added which drops into the Government coffers. What have they done with this extra cash? It was promised to be used on environmental issues but a question raised in Parliament earlier this year revealed not one penny of this cash sucked out of people has been used for the stated purpose. Just lies from Gordon Brown trying to justify this ludicrous tax. If anthropogenic activity (man’s contribution) was causing global warming, he would have a case for introducing taxes of this nature. However, the evidence there is doesn’t justify burning fossil fuels has had a serious effect. Carbon dioxide is a minor greenhouse gas. Water vapour in the atmosphere and clouds have a much greater effect. The IPCC (the research body who inform the politicians around the world) use computer models to forecast temperature rises and sea level changes. The models are inaccurate by up to 400%. IPCC have for the last 10 years revised estimates. Funnily enough the estimates are always down. In other words, the case for carbon dioxide levels being responsible for the current warming phase in the climate change cycle are grossly overstated. Best thing for people to do is take a look at this paper to be found at http://www.petitionproject.org – follow the links to “summary of peer reviewed research” which leads to the full account. Personally I think the Oregon petitioners have a sound case and man’s effect on climate change is miniscule – but there we do have an input which is grossly overstated and therefore gives politicians the excuse to burden us further with taxes. The IPCC are a bunch of scientists who research climate chang. Of course they are funded by the politicians of the world. Their draft reports are edited as they would be but their political masters produce the final published work based on the drafts. IPCC scientists give politicians what they want – keeps the funding.

By: Kris

Kris — Thu, 30 Oct 2008 19:28:40 +0000

As a research scientist, let me tell you that global warming is certainly not a scam. It will also not result in the end of the world. Rising sea levels will just mean that cities like New York and London will be prone to serious and perhaps permanent flooding. This will require a far more expensive remedy than 200 dollar a barrel oil or even the credit crunch. However, try explaining that to the average idiot in the street that goes for the buy now pay later deals and is massively in debt. Not doing anything about global warming today is essentially false economy, as it will cost a damn site more to repair the damage in the future. Especially considering that we will have to break our addiction to oil sooner or later, as it will eventually run out anyway. But hey, we’ll all be dead by the end of this century, so who cares if we screwed the planet for the next generation just because we couldn’t be bothered living sustainably? Lets buy now and let our children pay later?

By: John

John — Sun, 05 Oct 2008 05:23:19 +0000

I’ve recently bought some top-up loft insulation. The price included VAT. If the Government was really serious about us saving energy, energy saving products such as insulation would be zero rated. Global warming is being used as an excuse to increase taxes, like the back-dated car tax that’s going to hit poorer people. The high price of fuel alone should be enough to encourage energy saving without the government getting involved. What impact can the UK make anyway when China is building two power stations a week and car ownership is rising fast in developing countries. And is Bush going to upset his oil company paymasters by discouraging car use in the USA?

By: dave shakespeare

dave shakespeare — Fri, 05 Sep 2008 09:16:13 +0000

I agree with the stealth tax, a classic case of government spin and The Kings new clothes, if you don’t agree you must be against saving the planet. I’m hoping to build a new house in our garden and it will be green to save us money not because ‘Gordon’ and his cronies say so. I’ve tried, coal, bottle gas and now oil and now I’m going for a ground source heat pump, expensive to instal but V.A.T. free on new build plus only electricity to pay for to run the pump. I cannot see oil prices dropping much now we have accepted over 60p a litre.

By: Wern

Wern — Mon, 25 Aug 2008 15:35:13 +0000

My congratulation with first place in overall count on Olympic Games. Michael Phelps was the best!

By: biofuelman

biofuelman — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 11:29:37 +0000

no the gov sticks its nose into our lives too much as it is, we the majority are the ones who where supposed to have elected them? well i 4 one did not vote that t//t brown in and there should have been an election? i think this is what most people think ,this country of ours yes ours is still great,but not as long as people like blair /brown and the like just take us,the tax payer ,who pays their wages,take us for alooooong ride,suck up to bush,ect,ect,ect.we will be bshafted from morn till dusk ,i for one am sick and tired of it all,do any of u who read these bloggs care?well its time for a change if we all say no to higher prices,and wages stay the same well browns dont do they ?wwhen was the last time you gave yourself a pay rise like brown did?think about it ,is your money ,taxes ,do something about it ,say no,NO NO NONO MORE BYE HAVE A NICE DAY?