subsub wrote:Roy Twing wrote:subsub wrote:Roy Twing wrote:A snippet from an excellent article in Hitchen's column today, which I must must say in all modesty, is a rather better-written version of my main point regarding the insanity of the climate change protesters, and like Hitchens, - I would ask again if someone could explain the logic of destroying our economy whilst the 'developing' world thrives?:
"We recently closed and demolished Didcot ‘A’ coal-fired power station, an efficient, reasonably modern plant with a generating capacity of about 1.44 gigawatts. Why? Why not at least mothball it? But no such caution is allowed in the great cause of cutting CO2 emissions.
Look at the facts: an enormous 259 gigawatts (180 Didcots) of new coal-fired capacity are under development in China. That’s on top of the 993 gigawatts of coal-burning capacity China already possesses (690 Didcots).
The UK’s whole electrical generation capacity, in all forms of power, is 85 gigawatts (59 Didcots). If we gave up using electricity entirely, it would make no difference at all to the impact of Chinese coal burning on the atmosphere.
None. Not any. Zero. If we completely abolish all our fossil-fuel generation, including gas, it would likewise not matter in the slightest – except to us, our economy and our standard of living.
China’s planned increase, yes, increase, in coal power is three times the size of our whole electricity-generation industry – wind, nuclear gas, and all. India is also increasing coal generation and last March reached a coal capacity of 200 gigawatts (139 Didcots)."
The only 'argument' I've heard so far from the eco-warrior brigade, is a rather meek "well we have to start somewhere", or the similar but more patronising "we need to lead by example".
Great logic.
Other people are fucking up the environment, so let's do the same.
Yeah, let's all leave litter lying around because someone else does it
Read the article, take a deep breath, engage brain, and try again.
- I've read the snippet you provided - that contains all the pertinent info, presumably? (unless you left out something more important)
- you didn't provide a link to the article (and I'm damned if I'm going to increase the Mail's online readership)
- My point makes sense. Hitchens is saying that it doesn't matter what we do in the UK given what bigger countries do. I say that that is flawed logic, and I gave you an example – just because other people throw litter out of their cars doesn't mean that I should do the same.
Hitchens did go into a little more detail, but it was his analogy that I hoped might make you reconsider the 'logic' of the argument, - he wrote:
"We are like a thirsty man refusing to drink from a tap because of a water shortage, while his local water company leaves hundreds of leaks unrepaired, allowing thousands of gallons to drain away each hour. This is a futile, self-harming gesture. And these demonstrators, ignorant and engorged with self-righteous rage, demand more futility.", - but actually to follow your litter analogy, - it's like wading knee deep in McDonalds boxes on the way to work, and deciding to turn around and look for a litter bin, meanwhile, those who dropped the litter beat you to the job.
You are now out of pocket compared to the litterers, and still knee deep in litter.
It is this 'self-harming' whilst other countries laugh all the way to the bank that is my main argument against these eco warriors.