Households cut energy use by a quarter

antrobus

RichardD1970 wrote: »

Actually, "global warming" would cause the ice caps to melt, which would disrupt the gulf stream which keeps our climate temperate.

This would have the result of giving us a climate similar to that of Canada.

It would be more accurate to say that if the ice caps were to melt, then the resulting surge of cold water might disrupt the Gulf stream, which could plunge Western Europe into a new ice age, or might just simply counteract the effects of global warming and leave us back where we started.

MacMickster wrote: »

Just thought that I'd put that right for you. You might want to read the Luddites thread.

Well I'm not so sure I'd go that far. They do run these ever so sophisticated computer models which are based on some kind of science, so a lot of these outcomes are perfectly possible. It's just difficult to say how possible they are, but definitely wrong to imply that they're certain.

RichardD1970

MacMickster wrote: »

Just thought that I'd put that right for you. You might want to read the Luddites thread.

antrobus wrote: »

It would be more accurate to say that if the ice caps were to melt, then the resulting surge of cold water might disrupt the Gulf stream, which could plunge Western Europe into a new ice age, or might just simply counteract the effects of global warming and leave us back where we started.



Well I'm not so sure I'd go that far. They do run these ever so sophisticated computer models which are based on some kind of science, so a lot of these outcomes are perfectly possible. It's just difficult to say how possible they are, but definitely wrong to imply that they're certain.

It was a tongue in cheek post (hence the smiley at the end).

Global Warming has been change to Climate Change since they realised that global temperatures aren't uniformly rising.

I personally have a healthy scepticism with regards anything that the "experts" say on the subject. IMHO, whilst the climate could be changing, that is a natural process that has been happening for millions of years and our impact on such a complicated system is beyond analysis.

The whole Climate Change/Global Warming thing has just been seized upon by government to squeeze more taxes and controls over us and by business as a marketing tool.

An interesting book to read on the subject is Stare of Fear, by Michael Crichton. Although a novel, Michael Crichton is renowned for his research and has no vested interest on either side of the argument.

antrobus

RichardD1970 wrote: »

It was a tongue in cheek post (hence the smiley at the end)......

OK. You're forgiven.:)

RichardD1970 wrote: »

....The whole Climate Change/Global Warming thing has just been seized upon by government to squeeze more taxes and controls over us and by business as a marketing tool....

I'm not quite convinced that governments need much in the way of an excuse to squeeze more taxes out of people. I am however reasonably convinced that what remains of the ideological left are inclined to seize on the whole Climate Change/Global Warming thing as their last best chance of getting the revolution started.

N1AK

thedalmeny wrote:

Wouldn't it be a nice world where you could depend on people to actually adopt common sense, particularly when they're in possession of such sense. Instead of taking the default position of "Well, everyone else is doing it.. Why shouldn't i"...

I'd settle for a world in which people didn't dress their own opinion up as 'common sense' because they lack the skills required to support it with an effective argument.

Now you could argue that it was an ethical, civic duty or moral issue; I might not agree but at least the position makes some sense unlike your claims of 'common sense'.

N1AK

toby3000 wrote: »

I was under the impression that new TVs used much more energy. I also think comparing a desktop to a laptop or tablet isn't fair, since I know lots of people that leave a laptop or tablet on 24/7, so I suspect the energy saving is minor.

Surely the bigger saving is improved insulation/newer boilers.

Your suspicions are wrong

A typical computer + monitor draws ~15 watts when not in use (computer in hibernate, screen on standby). The previous Nexus 7 had a 4,325 mah battery. Thus the typical pc while not in uses the power equivalent of the Nexus's full battery in 68 hours (~3 days) and would use the whole battery in ~2 hours if it was on. My Nexus gets charged every 4-5 days and gets used for email, video, apps etc during that time.

Laptops used considerably less power than equivalent PCs even accounting for energy loss transferring power to and from the battery.

LCD/LED TVs use a lot less power than equivalent CRTs, they also had vastly less efficient standby modes. Some of that benefit has been lost because TVs have gotten larger and because many of the latest TVs do more in standby. However a 50" LED TV would still use less power than a 32" CRT from 10 years ago (the kind of thing that would be in many houses 6 years ago).

N1AK

RichardD1970 wrote:

The whole Climate Change/Global Warming thing has just been seized upon by government to squeeze more taxes and controls over us and by business as a marketing tool.

Regardless of the merits of the evidence behind climate change I've never gotten why people fall for this false belief so easily. If we got rid of all the taxes that had been brought in to discourage energy use, emissions etc then do you really think the government wouldn't have brought in other taxes instead?

As to Crichton's lack of a vested interest and research. I like him as an author but I don't share your admiration for his research and certainly don't see how you can know whether he has a vested interest or not. Many on both sides have a vested interest simply because they've chosen a side and don't want to be 'wrong'.

Crichton's position on climate change is actually reasonably nuanced at times; unfortunately what is often highlighted is performance in debates. He has been very effective in debating against climate change, but that is due to good oratory, attacking hypocritical liberals etc not debating the evidence itself.

I myself think Nate Silver covered the subject very well in 'The Signal and the Noise'. His focus is on how data and statistics are used (and misused) and I can't recall him taking a side.

OffGridLiving

Like it or not, the high prices of energy (via market forces and government taxation) is having the desired effect of encouraging people to use less energy.