Prepper Forum / Survivalist Forum banner
1 - 20 of 45 Posts

· Vendor
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
Don't know if many of you have seen the info on 15-minute cities, but it's supposed to
go into effect in 2024 in Oxford England

In the name of Climate Change, they will allow people to live, travel and move around
in 15-minute areas.

If your mom, children or loved ones live outside of your region, you have to get a special
permit to travel to see them.

This is happening, Do your homework, Prepare
 

· Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
Umm, for the most part the 15-minute & 20-minute cities are an actual construct, as in the neighborhoods were being designed to have the 6 basic essentials needed to be within walking or biking distance no matter where one is situated.

In most areas where it would take that long just to get into town, these 15+ minute cities do not exist.

I will say, considering there are over 7.8 billion people in this world, that is a crap load of car emissions. Not sure what should be done, but something definitely needs to change, whether it is electric automobiles, solar, or time allotments for going out. Some states have already written legislature to make it a 'ticketable' offense to leave a car/truck idling in the driveway/parking spot.

There seems to be a crap load more cases of Ashma, and respiratory problems in children then there were when I was growing up and can't help thinking that it is due to air quality.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
...well alrighty then, that tells me everything I need to know
Companies have been emission trading their pollution allotment for a very long time, whereas a Landscaper's mower produces the same emissions over an hour that a car will produce in 45 minutes. The point is we have over 7.8 billion people, which is almost 4 times the world population in 1900, and the 1st gas powered engine was only invented roughly 24 years prior. Now add the emissions from each person's gas powered: car, lawn mower, chainsaw, leaf blower, snowplow, boat, BBQ, stove, fireplace, boiler, etc.

One may live far away from the city, but the rains you are getting include the pollution of those major cities. It may not seem such a big deal right now where some people are sitting, but just image 25 years from now, then 50, and 100 years, with a rising population it ain't a pretty picture.

The problem is not one person, but the accumulation of the entire world. Larger populations mean more land turns into housing, more trees cut down to build, more trees cut down per person for fuel. There will one day be a point where this planet will not be able to sustain itself due to the world population.


So, yea, I am one of those people. I recycle, I reuse, I repurpose, I try to walk vs. driving as much as possible, only taking the truck out for a couple of times a week, and usually never more than 20 minutes away from any direction, for all other needs, public transportation, which around here, are using electric buses. So, in short, I preach what I teach.
 

· Super Moderator
1-6 months, natural disasters or economic collapse
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
I'll put aside the discussions of whether a changing climate is:
A. Bad for humanity and the planet
B. Possible to stop

Instead, I'll focus on the solution we choose with the assumption that the two points above are true.
How are we going to ask developing nations to stop their emissions? The entire western world could stop, and that would buy us a few more decades until the "crisis" is right back to where it's claimed to be now. In those decades, the same coal mining, the same oil burning, and the same deforestation will continue in order to warm, build, and feed the 3rd world and those who simply won't stop. 120 million people in China will not simply accept starvation. If Xi wants to keep power, he'll say and do anything that lets him continue pumping out whatever "pollution" he needs to in order to feed his people. The people of India will continue to burn oil and coal to cook with and run their production. The people of South America and Africa will continue to cut down all the vegetation they must to keep cooking their food. These are the parts of the world that are still expanding in their population growth. These are the parts of the world where internal combustion engine transportation options will absolutely explode in numbers.
You're not going to get these poor growing countries to stay poor and stop growing. You're not going to convince them to not fill the gap that western countries would create in stopping their own emissions.

The solution is not to guilt wealthy countries into giving up their luxury for the sake of a few more decades. In the grand scheme, it wouldn't matter. That being the case, the question must be asked... "why are exceptionally intelligent people, who are surely aware of this, still pushing this as a solution?" That's a different discussion entirely...

The solution will be to innovate. The solution will be to develop new technologies that address the problem.
We've never advanced by stopping progress, and we never will. We must find a way for ALL to advance.
Cramming people into urban micro-cities, treating them like cattle, and punishing those who wish to leave, is not a solution and will not be tolerated for long.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
You're saying decades, whereas I think the desire is centuries. Also, sadly, correct me if I am wrong with actual proof, but I do believe that USA is the # 2nd leader in emissions, w/ China being numeral uno.

This world has been around for millennia, but all it took is our innovations these past 2 centuries to turn all that around. Many of the solutions to fix this problem is right in front of our eyes, but the willingness to sacrifice one's lifestyle hinders this concept.

Oh, and your mentioning of herding people like cattle reminded me:

Cattle are frequently cited as having the most severe overall environmental impacts among livestock species due to: methane and nitrous oxide released from digestion and manure; land use and conversion; desertification; inefficient ratio of weight of feed and water consumed to weight of meat and dairy produced; ... source

There is a crap load of things that can be done, pun intended, but like congress, the world cannot see eye to eye, nor agree uniformly on anything, but we the people, yes the common man, you & I, if we all greatly reduce our carbon footprint, it might get big business to change lanes.

Look at Twitter for example, when Musk took over, supposedly a group of activists swayed big corporations to withdraw advertising directly due to public opinion.
 

· Vendor
Joined
·
99 Posts
Discussion Starter · #7 ·
I'll put aside the discussions of whether a changing climate is:
A. Bad for humanity and the planet
B. Possible to stop

Instead, I'll focus on the solution we choose with the assumption that the two points above are true.
How are we going to ask developing nations to stop their emissions? The entire western world could stop, and that would buy us a few more decades until the "crisis" is right back to where it's claimed to be now. In those decades, the same coal mining, the same oil burning, and the same deforestation will continue in order to warm, build, and feed the 3rd world and those who simply won't stop. 120 million people in China will not simply accept starvation. If Xi wants to keep power, he'll say and do anything that lets him continue pumping out whatever "pollution" he needs to in order to feed his people. The people of India will continue to burn oil and coal to cook with and run their production. The people of South America and Africa will continue to cut down all the vegetation they must to keep cooking their food. These are the parts of the world that are still expanding in their population growth. These are the parts of the world where internal combustion engine transportation options will absolutely explode in numbers.
You're not going to get these poor growing countries to stay poor and stop growing. You're not going to convince them to not fill the gap that western countries would create in stopping their own emissions.

The solution is not to guilt wealthy countries into giving up their luxury for the sake of a few more decades. In the grand scheme, it wouldn't matter. That being the case, the question must be asked... "why are exceptionally intelligent people, who are surely aware of this, still pushing this as a solution?" That's a different discussion entirely...

The solution will be to innovate. The solution will be to develop new technologies that address the problem.
We've never advanced by stopping progress, and we never will. We must find a way for ALL to advance.
Cramming people into urban micro-cities, treating them like cattle, and punishing those who wish to leave, is not a solution and will not be tolerated for long.
I don't know if you have ever been to China, but wow. I had an office in Bejing for a while and the sky
is literally black from pollution. It was a unique experience I must say
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,271 Posts
You're saying decades, whereas I think the desire is centuries. Also, sadly, correct me if I am wrong with actual proof, but I do believe that USA is the # 2nd leader in emissions, w/ China being numeral uno.

This world has been around for millennia, but all it took is our innovations these past 2 centuries to turn all that around. Many of the solutions to fix this problem is right in front of our eyes, but the willingness to sacrifice one's lifestyle hinders this concept.

Oh, and your mentioning of herding people like cattle reminded me:

Cattle are frequently cited as having the most severe overall environmental impacts among livestock species due to: methane and nitrous oxide released from digestion and manure; land use and conversion; desertification; inefficient ratio of weight of feed and water consumed to weight of meat and dairy produced; ... source

There is a crap load of things that can be done, pun intended, but like congress, the world cannot see eye to eye, nor agree uniformly on anything, but we the people, yes the common man, you & I, if we all greatly reduce our carbon footprint, it might get big business to change lanes.

Look at Twitter for example, when Musk took over, supposedly a group of activists swayed big corporations to withdraw advertising directly due to public opinion.
Great reduce your foot print. That just means more for the rest of us. Global warming my horses petuttie. One of the largest single sources of co2 are all animal life. That includes you. So save the planet stop breathing 🐶🐱🐭🐹🐰🦊🦁🐯🐨🦡🦘🐼🐮
 
  • Like
Reactions: Demitri.14

· Registered
Joined
·
401 Posts
R.O.M., Well if your name indicates anything, what was the temperature in summer and winter when you were 18, and what are they now at your current age. If you are old enough, you will get my drift, pun intended.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,271 Posts
Better stop at the booze store so I have enough. Almost 2000 party days till judgement day 🍺🍻🥂🍷🥃🍸🍹🍾🍺🍻🥂🍷🥃🍸🍹
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spenser

· Registered
Joined
·
6,605 Posts
The planet or good lord does a great job of getting rid of a overpopulated species. See how fast covid took over the earths population?? What's next??

Elites want us off petrol. Yet still fly around and ship things world wide on ships that pollute more then any cars.

They build stuff overseas with no pollution controls, shipping etc. Cheap so they can make a buck. Yet we have to get rid of our stove, you can't make this stuff up, LOL.
 

· Registered
Joined
·
2,271 Posts
R.O.M., Well if your name indicates anything, what was the temperature in summer and winter when you were 18, and what are they now at your current age. If you are old enough, you will get my drift, pun intended.
No better or worse than those of today. But back then we really didn't think about it. Course the chicken littles were all agog about the coming mini ice age. Didn't happen. Now you all say it comes to an end in five or so years. Bet you I'm still around in 2040
 

· Registered
Joined
·
428 Posts
Not sure what should be done, but something definitely needs to change, whether it is electric automobiles, solar, or time allotments for going out
With all due respect and best wishes, You are a text book victim of classic climate change Hegelian dialectic.
To have power you need control
To have control you need fear
Create fear and convince people you're they only one that can protect them.
...people will not only agree to give up their freedoms, they'll ask to give them up.

My main focus in prepping has always been to survive the sh!t storm of civil unrest that's going to happen when those in power try to enforce some ridiculous mandate like "time allotments for going out" in the name of climate change.
 

· Administrator
Joined
·
15,775 Posts
Don't know if many of you have seen the info on 15-minute cities, but it's supposed to
go into effect in 2024 in Oxford England

In the name of Climate Change, they will allow people to live, travel and move around
in 15-minute areas.

If your mom, children or loved ones live outside of your region, you have to get a special
permit to travel to see them.

This is happening, Do your homework, Prepare
The day something like this actually happens in America will be the day there are only beta male sissies left.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Real Old Man

· Super Moderator
1-6 months, natural disasters or economic collapse
Joined
·
11,253 Posts
You're saying decades, whereas I think the desire is centuries. Also, sadly, correct me if I am wrong with actual proof, but I do believe that USA is the # 2nd leader in emissions, w/ China being numeral uno.

This world has been around for millennia, but all it took is our innovations these past 2 centuries to turn all that around. Many of the solutions to fix this problem is right in front of our eyes, but the willingness to sacrifice one's lifestyle hinders this concept.
The desire is whatever they can sell to the foolish. The reality is that we won't affect anything.

Those innovations you blame have also caused the extension of the human lifespan, brought most of the world out of poverty, offered the culmination of the world's wealth of knowledge in our pockets, and broke our bonds to this terrestrial ball.
This world will be around long after we're gone. Pretending this issue is "saving the planet" is childish and short-sighted. The earth will be just fine.
IF, and I'm not anywhere close to being sold on the idea... but IF the worst should happen, the coastlines expand, deserts become tropical and rainforests become deserts, lakes dry up and new ones form from glacial melt, the world becomes a greener place due to the abundance of life-giving CO2, and more land becomes farmable, I'll take that in exchange for medical advancements, climate-controlled housing, indoor plumbing, a stable electrical grid, a longer lifespan, a handheld super-computer, and a real chance to watch humans set foot on another planet.
Humans will do what we've always done. We'll adapt. It's our best strength. But our adaptation is only possible through our innovation. Asking our species to stop innovating is a condemnation to death.
This isn't about saving the planet. It's about saving humanity. We don't do that by stifling innovation and telling people to do with less. That method ensures depopulation and our eventual demise.

At some point, humans will pass away as all things do. I'd rather it be with a bang than with a whimper.
As George Carlin said, the planet will shake us off like a bad case of fleas...
The earth will be just fine.
 
1 - 20 of 45 Posts
Top