Pollution of the air

15 thoughts on “Pollution of the air

  1. Michael White

    Looks like things are moving towards good at long last. The Guardian today launched its Climate Change programme, and the 1st offering is the petition below. We’ve already seen some notable groups, such as prestigious universities, call for divestment from fossil fuels for their investment funds. The UN Climate Change panel also support this divestment tactic away from fossil fuels. It has the potential to grow very rapidly. As more organisations subscribe, then those ‘pariah nations & companies’ that insist on using hydrocarbon fuel sources will become highly visible. The difference between the London & Edinburgh Parliaments could not be more profound. It is not hard to imagine eco-consumers refusing to use, travel by, or shop from these deliberate global polluters. Good luck to Alan Rusbridger and team, Mike 🙂


  2. Michael White

    Paris climate change talks are only 10 months away now. The media no doubt will generate 1000’s of tonnes of hot air explaining how everyone is very concerned about this, and that they will try and arrive at some, hopefully meaningful, agreement to do something over a few decades, ; or not as the case may be.

    The devastation caused by Cyclone Pam in the southwest Pacific Ocean last week has actually been useful, although a tragedy for many many people; you are all in our thoughts. The Leaders of Vanuatu, Kiribati, and Tuvalu all know that these increasingly frequent disasters have shifted from being ‘natural’ to being ‘anthropogenically-exacerbated’. So to all ‘shoppers’ around the world: “it is time to start thinking about how your choices affect the lives of other people elsewhere. We will ask that before you push your money over the counter, you ask yourself a question: do I really need this stuff?” Thank you 🙂

  3. Janos Post author

    Wonderful collection Mike, many thanks for this. The Guardian seems to be a good source indeed.

    Most of the politicians will behave as always, they will do some ass-protective measures by throwing some stuff for the media to crunch but I don’t expect them to do anything which would upset the big guys especially those who are responsible for the majority of the emission and pollution.

  4. Michael White

    Yes indeed Janos. Since its launch yesterday the Guardian’s campaign has grown rapidly. The thing I see as being the most likely to succeed quickly is the ‘divestment of funds from fossil fuels’. I read a lot more about it in recent hours and it seems credible that ~ because businesses are beholden to their shareholders, who require a profit ~ if money, perks, tax-breaks, and negligent legislation are up-ended then the large hydrocarbon industries might turn their minds to renewables. This is not actually new: BP Solar (British Petroleum) has been around for decades ~ it provided many installations in Australasia for instance (including battery technology development, and low-energy lighting). So it can be done, but it requires a change of mind from the fossil-fuel fixation.

    One of the articles I read suggests that the price of US oil may fall as low as $20 per barrel. The reason being to my mind is because oil became a geostrategic manipulatory tool: i.e. the USA and cronies sought to bankrupt opposing nations, such as Russia and Venezuela. Usually the OPEC countries would have cut production to force oil prices higher ~ but this time they didn’t. Production remains high, so there are obviously other geostrategic games in play. I heard that some companies have huge volumes of oil being kept at sea (I presume tankers full of the stuff) waiting for oil prices to increase again.

    So I see that there has never been a better time to grab solar, wind & tide technology and really make a change for good on our planet, Mike 🙂

    1. Janos Post author

      Yes Mike, there was an article probably on The Guardian too, saying that OPEC now wants to keep the market share, being that more important for them than the price actually, instead of cutting production and trying to keep the prices high.

  5. Michael White

    Yes Janos, I thought the same too.

    Alan Rusbridger emailed to say that the ‘keep it in the ground’ campaign got 84,000 signatures in the first 24 hours ~ so divestment is probably a very helpful tool for change … hits the vested interests in the pockets. Mike 🙂

Leave a Reply