Inspiring Video about Climate Action!

[MichaelP]

I'm sure many people on this forum are very passionate about the environment, conservation and also climate change action.

I just found this video which outlines a vision of how to reach a safe climate future.
It is very, very, very inspiring and goosebump-inducing. I imagine many other forum users will be interested in it. (I hope I'm not breaking any forum rules here...)

Watch it here (Link removed by admin in line with forum rule 2.)

Enjoy

[Chief]

2 minutes and 8 seconds of my life that i'll never get back..
thanks alot!!

[vagrom]

Chief, please! That's callous...

[flyfisher]

[flyfisher]

Chief, please! That's callous...

+1

Didn't think that little effort was too bad.

Just a plea by young people not to ruin the world. It's run by older people who won't be here to see what happens.

[MichaelP]

Chief... You added about a minute to your wasted time coming back on here to let us know.

Thanks everyone else for understanding the actual message of the video

[Nuts]

Just an observation: Chief may in fact be an ardent environmentalist. He may have felt passionate enough to make a simple statement based on well considered(?) judgement that the (currently) proposed action is not the best way 'moving forward', who knows?

And a thought: Climate change is based on science and 'science' is calling for action, fair enough. Beyond that though science itself will have no future without continual questioning, so all points of view should be valid.... who knows though, perhaps Chief meant that he wasted that much time trying to get the vid to load...

And then questions?: What is the best thing for the environment 'long-term'? Some would say without continued prosperity there will be no long term ability to effect Meaningful change and have very real concerns about the direction? Others would say proposed action will bring further prosperity? Here though, the outcome of the proposed action steps outside the boundaries of science and into the realm of politics, which (like it or not and whatever point of view) comes back to the motivation for the vid (nicely made as it is and as clever in avoidance), it clearly aligns with the outcomes of one political agenda over another given current events (probably moreso than live export issues in a topic recently locked...)

[Cocksy_86]

Why did someone have to post a political message in this forum. Comment removed by admin. Can't people see that we already get into heated debates about whether one should hike with a hammock or a tent. We all value our national parks and ecosystems for hiking purposes (amongst other reasons), otherwise we wouldn't be a member of this forum, so I'm sure we already do steps in our own way to protect the things that we value.

To be honest, I'm more concerned with the 200 million toads, 20 million feral cats, and 5 million hectres of lantana ruining our backyard. Or the heavy metals from car exhausts washing down into our waterways which are killing the invertebres filtering up through the rest of the food chain. I'm not interested in vague marketing videos tainted with subtle political messages that hold very little educational material other than to manipulate the emotions of the viewer to feel and think that if you do not agree with Human Influenced Climate Change, then you do not care for the environment.

Keep out the politics of this forum.

[tasadam]

Topics like this are difficult to moderate.
As a moderator on the forum, it is my task to see the rules of the forum upheld.
Political discussion is indeed against forum rules.
I have not watched the content of the linked video as I do not wish to taint my view on this topic, rather I would prefer to judge this topic on its merit by the content I read on this forum.
The post linking the video suggests it contains something environmental, which is not against forum rules. It is up to members whether or not they choose to view it.
There is no discussion about politics as yet, only an accusation and a suggestion that this is political.
So for now, this topic stays.

I would ask though that all forum rules are observed, including rule 1.

Can I ask of anyone who has watched it, does the attached video contain anything directly political, that might be considered against rule 4?

[Cocksy_86]

Tasadam, it does break rule 2. The video includes propaganda for a non-profit, voluntary organisation AYCC at the end of the video and on the YouTube webpage.

[stepbystep]

LOL, bring back controversy corner and allow open debate, we all have opinions that invariably bring in politics and many of them are bushwalking related, think PAWS funding, climate change, forestry etc.
Admittedly live animal export is a bit off track , but I'm happy to have the debate...

Maybe controversy corner can be as nuts said before his post disappeared from the private forum thread, a private forum that people can choose to be a member of, or not??

[tasadam]

Due to concerns raised, I have been left with no option but to watch the linked video.
You are quite right in that this link is directly to what could be considered propaganda on behalf of an organisation, and as such I have removed the link.
It is in breach of forum rule 2.
I am leaving this topic so that others may learn what is or is not suitable content for this forum, If in doubt, ask, or read the forum rules.

I have also made Son of a beach aware of this topic, in case he decides to overturn my decision (which is unlikely, but I have asked).

[MichaelP]

My apologies. I do not consider this video political at all, yet I understand that it has been removed due to the logo at the end.

[tasadam]

My apologies. I do not consider this video political at all, yet I understand that it has been removed due to the logo at the end.

Not political, but a form of propaganda.
See my previous comment. Please read rule 2, that may explain further.
The direct discussion of environmental issues associated with what was linked may be discussed here in line with the rules, but these discussions often turn political and such a change will result in the topic being locked.
Not that I am trigger happy, but I have already spent a substantial chunk of time on this.
Regards.

[MichaelP]

Yep I understand. If I were to upload another video with out the logo at the end it'd be a-okay as far as I understand.

[Cocksy_86]

I (personally) don't agree with the science behind Human Influenced Global Warming. I do agree behind the science that increased CO2 concentration is lowering the pH levels of the oceans which is having an overall negative affect to the majority of marine life. So you and I have the same desire to lower CO2 back to the balanced levels, although it is for different reasons.

I'm a big believer in grass roots approach (although I don't think it's the only necessary approach). For example, to lower heavy metal pollution, I try to walk/ride when I can, work locally, buy locally, process my own food, and on the edge of buying an eBike for local transit. I figure, if every Australian did that, it would resolve the problem enough for that environmental issue.

So my question is: What (achievable) things can an individual Australian do to absorb some of the CO2 and lower the CO2 output? I've listed some things that I can think of (which are uneducated guesses), can you correct me or add to the list?

Buy locally and process local produce
Work locally
Walk/Bike Ride when possible
Invest in solar polar
Invest in an eBike for local transit
Plant one native tree a month (it's not much, but if every Australian did so that would be 240million trees a year) If having to cut down a tree, at least plant another of the same type somewhere close by.
Pay money to environmental charities (which I won't name in order not to break the rules)
Read a book rather than sit on a computer playing games or reading forums In general, lower electricity use.
Take the train rather than fly by plane?
Buy ethical timber
Invest in companies that have a good environmental and social responsibility
...what else??

[MichaelP]

I must say, I have so much respect for people who don't agree with the science behind anthropogenic climate change yet still understand that increased carbon emissions are an issue. It's a relief to see that the debate isn't two polar opinions.

I'm a massive fan of your list!
I agree with every single one.

Not all that much I would add.
Go on the occasional reforestation trip and plant a large amount of trees in one go (i did this last weekend and it was a lot of fun)
Other things you can do around home to reduce power usage (turn off lights, turn off appliances at the wall, hang washing rather than use a dryer etc...)
Eat less meat and animal products (some meats are more emissions intensive than others e.g. beef)
Recycle of course!
Avoid driving (use a bike or if need public transport)

[sthughes]

I think the elephant in the room, especially in relation to oil consumption, is that regardless of carbon emissions and environmental impacts we are rapidly running out of the stuff. Pretty soon we will have to find another way to move people and stuff around, and the sooner we begin to move away from it the less economic shock it will cause.

I find it annoying that people are so focused on the negatives they fail to see the enormous opportunities in a clean energy future.

Turn down (or off) the heater and put on some extra clothes (and in summer air con is rarely necessary, and should be set higher when it is. Humans can survive at temperatures over 22 degrees!).

Wish I could catch a train. The last person to do that around here got arrested! http://prelive.themercury.com.au/article/2011/02/22/209251_tasmania-news.html

Roll on Generation 4 nuclear!

[Nuts]

Some of the local actions mentioned above are exactly the same things we banged on about 'when i were a lad'. All very noble, yet history shows, have limited impact to any great extent.

'Legislation to put a price on pollution', as shameful an outcome it is, is probably necessary (regardless of 'beliefs'). Its all pretty dubious once politicians get involved though, as soon as they want something they haunt uni campuses or factory floors appealing to (manipulated?) 'ideals' or drumming up fear amongst honest working people.

Many of these environmental problems already could be brought under control by existing legislation and at some stage, the call needs to be stronger for this to happen (even with new taxes). New laws will just be watered down or factored into costs once the points have been scored (step forward a 'Productivity Commission'...) If nothing else though, something like what is proposed, is perhaps some sort of a start..

[Karlostavitch]

I haven't seen the video here's my 2 cents.

The polution you and I create is pretty insignificant in comparison to industry, and in most cases industry only responds to its bottom line.

So if you take the whole Global Warming debate aside, (whats global warming, never heard of it!) and you simply make pumping polution into the atmosphere more expensive than renewable energy, then industry will respond.

If people's power prices increase, than people will look for ways to save money too. Research and production will increase for LED's, solar panels, and other energy saving devices.

That means :-
cheaper and more efficient LED's / lighting
cheaper and more efficent Solar Panels
almost all efficient alternatives will become cheaper through production
less polution into the atmosphere through reduced burning of fossil fuels (whether it be CO2 or other by polutents)
Less deforestation (more places for hiking!)

Some people might need to opt for a career change from high polution industry, but many jobs will be created in greener industries.

Sounds good to me, I don't see what all the fuss is about, lets just do it.

[Cocksy_86]

I've tried to give up red meat a number of times for environmental and sustainability reasons. I consider it a rather overwhelming environmental cost for something that (in a generally sense) isn't necessary for every meal.

However, I must have been a T-Rex in a earlier life and can't seem to give it up. Especially when I can smell the neighbours BBQ pool party or walking by the pub.

I have managed to reduce my red meat intake by eating (homemade not from the jar) dishes like mushroom rissoto, apricot chicken, pasta fagioli, pumpkin and couscous salad, vegetable curry ect.

[Cocksy_86]

I think it's more complicated than that Karlostavitch. But I think we're starting to dabble into politics now.

The point I was trying to make is an industry will respond to its market. A good example is people purchasing free range eggs instead of cage eggs. Many individuals making an individual choice has forced the industry to change.

[taswegian]

The polution you and I create is pretty insignificant in comparison to industry, and in most cases industry only responds to its bottom line.

But we are the end users that take in what big industry offers for sale.
We can't hide behind them. They only supply what we clamour for and must have no expenses spared type stuff.

What happened when we stopped using asbestos? There's an abundance of it still about but the world didn't suddenly boil over or freeze to death or get burnt up when the decision was made to end its use.
There's a mindset that that struggles with 'lets just give this, or that up' and move to another safer alternative, even if there are 'bucketloads' of the stuff for the taking.

Too much time wasted in debating WHO or WHAT is responsible for climate change.
I say lets just get on and devise those new and exciting gadgets and innovations that propel us into the next 'industrial revolution' free of the dinasours of the present age we seem to want to hang onto.
I reckon I could almost predict a 'watch this space' and let the eyes boggle at what comes out of the woodwork.

Then my kids and grandkids can give thanks for the changes we made in our time.

[Nuts]

The point I was trying to make is an industry will respond to its market. A good example is people purchasing free range eggs instead of cage eggs. Many individuals making an individual choice has forced the industry to change.

seems everyone is on the same page, if maybe different chapters. Its a good topic, started with reference to the vid which probably was best binned to not cloud the issues. i still see the same row of free range eggs amongst all the imports that has been there a long time... The governments polls would suggest most are still bargain hunters not tasty egg lovers!


however, from the vid, the group, the topic was a call for immediate 'global scale' action, seems a bit limited in scope and a gamble spent on one issue but perhaps the start of something i haven't seen in my lifetime... interesting..

[stepbystep]

I think what most people are worried about with the proposed course of action is what's going to happen to all the $$$, I work damned hard for mine as most of us do and hate to see it used wastefully.
All the above is true and we can only hope industry innovates as they always have.

Cocksey re. the meat, give up 1 animal at a time
We're definitely better off buying all of our food locally as a start, be it meat or veg, doing a bit of research as to who grows/rears it and the conditions under which this happens. We have cut our meat consumption by heaps. We pay more for it when we get it but it tastes better, is better for us, supports a local producer that is making the effort to innovate and is better for the environment.

If we translate this policy to the services we use and other products we use all the better too.