Off Topic Politics Thread

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
The article says he is BPs No1 candidate in the West Mids so he is guaranteed to win. UKIP got nearly a third of the vote in West Mids in 2014, 3 seats. 2 now defected to BP and 1 is an independent. Is the article right? Is he really No1 candidate? Above the 2 that are already MEPs? Or are they standing down / being moved?
 
TheSecondStain said:
FLT. Just my thoughts as I haven't dug into the latest evidence, so I'm ok with being flamed. Historically, we've used consumer plastic without real responsibility. There is a problem though. Unless we make the system of recycling/disposing of it without the environment suffering, it becomes the next big environmental hazard on the the growing list of big environmental hazards. The present system, where the plastic ends up with the private consumer to deal with, is too complicated by far. Triangles with a number in the centre don't really cut it with the vast majority of people. I have to constantly remind myself what is ok and not ok, and I consider myself moderately more informed than the average person. Suddenly expecting some little old lady or gent to take responsibility and to know exactly what to do with their milk cartons, and remember it, all without best practice infrastructure in place, is asking almost the impossible. The consumer has a range of responses to this stuff, from being 'informed concerned', through 'trusting the seller', to 'not giving a toss'. All these consumers have to be covered in one policy, if the product is going to end up in their hands.
And of course, the new biggie is plastic microbeads. How long have we been ingesting plastic through the food chain and how can we avoid it? It has been estimated that upto 90% of people in the developed world have ingested plastic in their systems, including their bloodstreams. Now, I've no idea of the validity of that estimate, but whatever, it ain't good.
There is too much plastic around, straight up. Yes, I can hear the counter argument that there is enough plastic around and no more, even on the most presented of products. The main problem with plastic is our attitude to it. We take it for granted. It's a miracle product with major/minor adverse side effects that upto now we haven't dealt with. The plastics industry has to take some responsibilty for an attitude change, as have politicians, regulators and finally us. And I think ordinary people will do their bit if the infrastructure is put properly in place. Like it hasn't been so far.
Click to expand...

TSS, you are right in a lot of this post. Couple of points to pick up on:

1. Don’t underestimate how much responsibility the plastics industry is trying to take. Not enough people are listening.

2. Absolutely agree with you about people and consumer attitude, but I disagree with you on the “little old lady” part. It can be made easier and even if it is a little difficult, that doesn’t excuse us humans not doing the right things.


Check out these Swedish city:

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6523130480458633216


The reason I comment in the way I did to Imps, is because of the lack of education and knowledge, coupled with the media anti-plastics frenzy, has people misunderstanding what can be done.

I’ve been crying out to have the infrastructure in place for years, long before blue planet raised the profile of plastic in our oceans. It is the biggest area to make a huge impact, but our governments don’t appear to tackle it. I have said for years that every household should have the same recycling system.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: TheSecondStain, MIsaints and ChilcoSaint
fatletiss said:
TSS, you are right in a lot of this post. Couple of points to pick up on:

1. Don’t underestimate how much responsibility the plastics industry is trying to take. Not enough people are listening.

2. Absolutely agree with you about people and consumer attitude, but I disagree with you on the “little old lady” part. It can be made easier and even if it is a little difficult, that doesn’t excuse us humans not doing the right things.


Check out these Swedish city:

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6523130480458633216


The reason I comment in the way I did to Imps, is because of the lack of education and knowledge, coupled with the media anti-plastics frenzy, has people misunderstanding what can be done.

I’ve been crying out to have the infrastructure in place for years, long before blue planet raised the profile of plastic in our oceans. It is the biggest area to make a huge impact, but our governments don’t appear to tackle it. I have said for years that every household should have the same recycling system.
Click to expand...

Not on linked in. Cut and paste?
 
ImpSaint said:
Just having a very strange discussion with a fellow greenie on one platform who is arguing with lots of anti greens and deniers (along with me) who is under the impression that CO2 is a useless pollutant. To which the antis replied that CO2 is the building block of life and without it plants would not grow. To which the greenie sneered "I think you guys are confusing CO2 with carbon."

Very strange reply indeed. Where does this chap/chapess think plants get their carbon from? And how does he/she think we came into being if not for plants using CO2 to get their carbon and provide us with the O we need to breathe?
Click to expand...

While we fry?

It sounds like you’re suggesting more CO2 will give us more plants and more oxygen?
 
shoot_spiderman said:
While we fry?

It sounds like you’re suggesting more CO2 will give us more plants and more oxygen?
Click to expand...
The argument is the wrong way round. Growing more trees and plants absorbs more CO2 and produces more oxygen, but what is actually happening is that the rain forests, the lungs of the planet, are being systematically destroyed and not replaced with equivalent amounts of chlorophyll-bearing plants. The other major source of oxygen, the blue-green algae in the oceans, is also being systematically destroyed by pollutants.

If we cleaned up the oceans and planted a few billion trees it would at least be a start.
 
  • Like
Reactions: shoot_spiderman, ImpSaint and davecg69
fatletiss said:
TSS, you are right in a lot of this post. Couple of points to pick up on:

1. Don’t underestimate how much responsibility the plastics industry is trying to take. Not enough people are listening.

2. Absolutely agree with you about people and consumer attitude, but I disagree with you on the “little old lady” part. It can be made easier and even if it is a little difficult, that doesn’t excuse us humans not doing the right things.


Check out these Swedish city:

https://www.linkedin.com/feed/update/urn:li:activity:6523130480458633216


The reason I comment in the way I did to Imps, is because of the lack of education and knowledge, coupled with the media anti-plastics frenzy, has people misunderstanding what can be done.

I’ve been crying out to have the infrastructure in place for years, long before blue planet raised the profile of plastic in our oceans. It is the biggest area to make a huge impact, but our governments don’t appear to tackle it. I have said for years that every household should have the same recycling system.
Click to expand...

Tbf, your answer is barely any different to my view. Again, just my thoughts.
I totally get that people aren't listening. People, in my experience, don't if the initial perception is, 'am I going to be worse off from this change?' 'Is this going to cost?' Well, it's costing now.

The 'little old lady and gent' part could be solved by well thought out infrastructure, as you say, throughout Europe, financed at national government or EU level [no good leaving it to individual councils] and a more obvious and consistent labelling system that is 'people proof'. Then it is just a matter of us people doing the quick check so see which bin we throw it into. That would be 7 different bins, just for different plastic types. Already there, I can begin to see a human 'I don't know/don't give a toss' problem. The present inconsistent system, as it stands, is still no excuse for people not to adhere to, yet it does give people an excuse. For example, what should one do with a tin can or a cardboard milk carton, both with thin plastic liners? Some councils say recycle, some say don't.

There will always be plastics, and consequently there will always be an oil industry. They are too damn useful. But we need a closed cycle method of producing them, using them, and recycling them, and they need to be harmlessly biodegradable or recyclable. And we need a change in society's responsibility through education, taught in schools and through public information films and online information and notifications. No leaflet drops.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint and fatletiss
TheSecondStain said:
Tbf, your answer is barely any different to my view. Again, just my thoughts.
I totally get that people aren't listening. People, in my experience, don't if the initial perception is, 'am I going to be worse off from this change?' 'Is this going to cost?' Well, it's costing now.

The 'little old lady and gent' part could be solved by well thought out infrastructure, as you say, throughout Europe, financed at national government or EU level [no good leaving it to individual councils] and a more obvious and consistent labelling system that is 'people proof'. Then it is just a matter of us people doing the quick check so see which bin we throw it into. That would be 7 different bins, just for different plastic types. Already there, I can begin to see a human 'I don't know/don't give a toss' problem. The present inconsistent system, as it stands, is still no excuse for people not to adhere to, yet it does give people an excuse. For example, what should one do with a tin can or a cardboard milk carton, both with thin plastic liners? Some councils say recycle, some say don't.

There will always be plastics, and consequently there will always be an oil industry. They are too damn useful. But we need a closed cycle method of producing them, using them, and recycling them, and they need to be harmlessly biodegradable or recyclable. And we need a change in society's responsibility through education, taught in schools and through public information films and online information and notifications. No leaflet drops.
Click to expand...

Yep agreed. There are already closed loop systems in place, just not enough. I also agree on the difficulty of the 7 recycling bins (although that’s a people problem again) and the alternative to that is centralised sorting, which is also possible but at a financial cost (still better than killing the planet).

One simple example of the problem is black food packaging. Black is made using carbon, which is not detectable through the recycling stream, yet there have been non-carbon, detectable blacks available for years. They cost more and so supermarkets to date have shunned them. How much more to they cost? Less than 1p pet meat tray. Who wouldn’t pay (they probably wouldn’t even notice) £4.96 rather than £4.95 for a couple of pieces of meat in a tray that would be fully recyclable.

The local council recycling issue has been a big bear of mine for years. Plastic, tin, paper, card industries and governments need to collaborate properly to sort this out.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ImpSaint
ImpSaint said:
Just having a very strange discussion with a fellow greenie on one platform who is arguing with lots of anti greens and deniers (along with me) who is under the impression that CO2 is a useless pollutant. To which the antis replied that CO2 is the building block of life and without it plants would not grow. To which the greenie sneered "I think you guys are confusing CO2 with carbon."

Very strange reply indeed. Where does this chap/chapess think plants get their carbon from? And how does he/she think we came into being if not for plants using CO2 to get their carbon and provide us with the O we need to breathe?
Click to expand...
Actually there is quite a big difference between CO2 and Carbon in the context of the correct amounts required for life and where they should be. If you want an Earth with a habitat most suited to humans, then the present CO2 content in the atmosphere is too high. Plus we are reducing the numbers of trees which can absorb the CO2. Our whole problem is that we have underminded and are underminding what the natural carbon system has done and is doing - that is it takes the resident CO2 from the atmosphere and locks it up underground as Carbon. The seas absorb the CO2 through molecular diffusion, when atmospheric CO2 is high, and through photosynthesis in plankton and algae. The activities of humans with our tendency to mine, refine and combust, is to liberate too much of that Carbon to CO2 [hey, let's put aside the poisonous sulpurs, etc, through incomplete combustion, this time] for the natural system to cope with. Deniers say humans are so insignificant it doesn't make a real difference. This is to be completely ignorant of the chemistry going on in the Earth's system. Sure, we are small, but the Earth's systems are delicate. Do 150 years of combustion, and at an ever increasing rate, and the Earth starts adjusting [actually, it adjusts from the first fire, just not enough that we'd notice], and sadly not in our favour.

Small point, - breathable oxygen [21% of the atmosphere] is O2. O bonds with anything it can find, generally another O, but as we know it bonds with Carbon quite happily too.
Another small but significant point - plants and trees actually exhale [or 'respire'] a small amount of CO2 during night time when photosynthesis stops, although it is nowhere near the amount of CO2 they take in for exchange of O2 during the day. Sleeping animals don't die in their boughs, for example.
 
Last edited:
fatletiss said:
Yep agreed. There are already closed loop systems in place, just not enough. I also agree on the difficulty of the 7 recycling bins (although that’s a people problem again) and the alternative to that is centralised sorting, which is also possible but at a financial cost (still better than killing the planet).

One simple example of the problem is black food packaging. Black is made using carbon, which is not detectable through the recycling stream, yet there have been non-carbon, detectable blacks available for years. They cost more and so supermarkets to date have shunned them. How much more to they cost? Less than 1p pet meat tray. Who wouldn’t pay (they probably wouldn’t even notice) £4.96 rather than £4.95 for a couple of pieces of meat in a tray that would be fully recyclable.

The local council recycling issue has been a big bear of mine for years. Plastic, tin, paper, card industries and governments need to collaborate properly to sort this out.
Click to expand...

Well there you go. There are people who would suggest that I have just corresponded with the Fox on how to protect the Henhouse, but I've known your stance on this well enough that you realise the best way to keep a global plastics industry is to make sure it harmonises with the planet.
 
  • Like
Reactions: fatletiss
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back