Richard Branson to donate £3bn to fight climate change
- Thread starter Loki
- Start date
AJUK said:
How can you say 3 billion pounds won't make any difference? Do you know how much 3 billion pounds is?
As for the cynics saying hes doing it to make money (which I don't believe), does it matter if in the processes of saving the planet, he makes a few quid out of it? Personally, I think he should be commended.
Soldato
sniffy said:Seems like it's that time of the month for a lot of members here
*sits back and waits for his rolleyes
Happy now?
woodsy2k said:
CFC have little to do with global warming.
1) the earth will warm up what ever we do. We coming out of an ice age. Yes where speeding it up. But ultimately we can't stop it.
2) Co2 isn't a very bad green house gas
3) methane from animals is a serious greenhouse gas. So unless we cut back on are meat diet. Not much can be done. Although they are trying to genetically engineer a fart-less cow.
alternative fuels aren't as easy as people thing.
1) bio fuels can't be produced in large enough qaunties. It cant even provide 5% of the UK power needs.
2) hydrogen although plentiful. Gives out water. Right I hear you saying whys that a problem. Well Like co2 its a natural gas (or vapour in this case). However water is 100X more effective as a green house gas than co2 is. Now how many prototype or running cars do you see that collect this water vapour. Nope guess what none.
Thats just the tip off it.
Welshy said:
I doubt its a marketing thing. The Virgin Brand is pretty much universally accepted and renowned so does it need any more marketing ? I think its a good gesture. Hopefully it does trickle down to giving some results to help us all.
he is using what will amount to 3bn over 10 years to find fuel that will enable him to continue to fly atlantic flights, where in there will the human population benefit from a fight against global warming. it is only of benefit to his business, many other businesses are doing what they can but not on such a large scale. alternative fuel sources will do as much damage as the current fossil fuel age will, but in a different way. the talk of biodiesel and ethanol is encouraging big businesses to clear tropical forest and subsistence farmers to plant sugarbeet and grow palm for oil and oil seed rape.
Nowhere is it dicussed to reduce our use just keep on using a different form of fuel and force someone else off their land for our benefit. his 'gesture' would do more for global warming if he was to install microgeneration on/in every house in this country over the next decade.
Nowhere is it dicussed to reduce our use just keep on using a different form of fuel and force someone else off their land for our benefit. his 'gesture' would do more for global warming if he was to install microgeneration on/in every house in this country over the next decade.
Associate
AcidHell2 said:
Brilliant attitude, global warming will happen regardless so what the hell why bother trying to make a difference
AcidHell2 said:
And yet it is the biggest contributer to the greenhouse gas effect
AcidHell2 said:
Guess that's what happened to the dinosaurs then, too much farting, greenhouse gas, global warming leading to ice age.
AcidHell2 said:
Why does everyone assume that alternative fuels are the only answer, if we learned to manage the resources we have a little better we wouldn't need to rely on alternative fuel as the answer. America and Austrialia are the only 2 major countries not to have signed up to the Koyoto principle. America is the biggest contributer of Global CO2 emissions not helped by the fact that their cars are gas gusslers with the lowest emission standards of any major country, alternative fuel will not make a blind bit of difference until we learn to manage our current resources.
And before anybody makes another quip about the Al Gore film, yes i have seen it, and i would recommend that anyone who has an opportunity to see it should. People need to wake up to the global warming and the effects it is having on this planet. Front page of the major paper in N. Ireland this morning read FREAK STORM LOOMS - 22C Heat and 70mph winds expected, luckily by late afternoon the hurricane from where this was coming blew out over the atlantic but how long before it doesn't, how long before it just keeps coming and we have our own Katrina to contend with?
Makavelli said:
I'm realistic. If the 10 year prediction is right, then the only way to "save" us is by bankrupting ever nation dependent of fuel. I'm sorry I would rather cope with the effects like us humans are renowned for doing. Than bankrupt are society and end are way of life.
Also we can't do it as a nation. Its goto include every country to put an effort in. Places like china are building huge coal power stations. These will be chucking out vast amounts of co2.
basically there is little we can do, the sooner people relies that the better. Where humans, where great at inventing and surviving. We will adapt.
naffa said:I know this is totally the wrong place to post this, but do you have a Charger?
yes, in a rusted out state.
http://www.ocuk-motors.co.uk/gallery2/main.php?g2_view=core.ShowItem&g2_itemId=2281
(pic subwing is the current state)
Associate
Nobody's noticed that it's actually $3bn so 'only' £1.6bn
Permabanned
What a good man, fair play to him. A great Briton.
Associate
AcidHell2 said:
I am assuming that you don't vote then as you are obviously not a great believer in the power of democracy. Women campaigning for the vote, Martin Luther King for civil rights, Nelson Mandella to end apartheid, Bob Geldolf - Live Aid & Live8, Abraham lincoln abolished slavery. All people with a drive and determination to make the world a better place, the measure of their success perhaps remains to be since but the fact of the matter is they did make a difference of some description. Maybe the average Joe Bloggs like you or I does not have the same destiny to greatness but that is what the electoral system is for so we can put in place people who will do it for us. We are a Super Power for goodness sake and as such surely we have an obligation to take the lead in matters such as these and use our influence on other countries to do something positive about the problem.
If the predictions are right and the Artic Circle completely melts we won't have a society or way of life to worry about certainly not in western europe anyway.
Makavelli said:
Yes I vote, don't see what that has to do with anything. No country is going to get china to rip down brand new power plants.
But if we said we managed it, what would you replace it with. Whilst not bankrupting the economies of numerous countries. Also you have a time scale of 10 years. Well lets say they have it wrong as the data isn't accurate at all. So call it 20 years.
We have the technology to cut co2 emissions by almost 100% apart from flight. We don't have the infrastructure, people don't have the money to buy brand new everything. And companies are wasting(well not wasting as I think all research helps are understanding) of bio-fuels which we can't grow enough of even if we carpeted the entire UK with crops and nothing but crops you end up with something like 5% of the oil the uk requires.
Until some one can show the technology, show how to pay for the infrastructure and get all nations involved in a very short time frame. there's not much anyone can do.
Associate
AcidHell2 said:
Well obviously voting has to do with something - do you vote for the sake of it or do you believe in a candidate and his policies? eg If Al Gore had won the presidential election instead of George Bush one could argue that America would be signed up to Koyoto - and perhaps the Gulf War II might not have happened, hypothetical i know but those are the possibilites that democracy offers. I'm sorry mate but you say realist and i say defeatist so far all you have given are excuses for why we should not bother to tackle global warming. I agree with you about bio fuels but i said that in my earlier post, why do you assume that it has to be all or nothing? We could cut CO2 emissions by 100% but do we need to? and all at once? The same goes for bio-fuel why do you assume that we need to be totally dependent on them for change to happen. Also i didn't quote the 10 year time frame you did, you may be right about China but if we don't at least try and set an example how can we expect others to follow.
This maybe an obtuse analogy - but you wouldn't give a child Alcohol because the chances are he is going to end up drinking anyway so why essentially take the same ambivilous attitude to global warming? As long as people think they can't make a difference then they won't.
Good on him. If you were to think of any major investor with the ability to think 'outside the box' enough to actually pull this off and develop far more efficient systems and energy sources I would put Branson at the top of the list.
'Renewable energy technologies' is a vast enough area that I could imagine succesful products coming out of this that might make him considerable sums of money.
Micro production technology for the home.
Tidal generation
Development of heat exchange technologies
Methane powered micro generators fitted to the back of every livestock animal
'Renewable energy technologies' is a vast enough area that I could imagine succesful products coming out of this that might make him considerable sums of money.
Micro production technology for the home.
Tidal generation
Development of heat exchange technologies
Methane powered micro generators fitted to the back of every livestock animal