I have a rechargeable lawn mower, weed whacker and leaf blower, next year it will be a cordless chainsaw, holy shit are they nice. I like the worx brand…the batteries are all interchangeable. I hate gas mowers…noisy and fucking stinky.
It's a great idea, and it's something which should be done to all gas vehicles, after sufficient investment in e-infrastructure.
Ironically, the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify for recharging electric vehicles, are the oil companies. And the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify to manufacturing electric vehicles, are the auto companies. Brave moves like Ford's will catalyze the demand for recharging stations, which hopefully proliferate quickly so the auto industry can jump on the Ford bandwagon. Seems to me in the case of climate change, business-led progress is a carrot, while government-led progress is a stick.
That will be the key. In bigger cities there are already some charging stations, but once you get out in the rural areas, it is non existent. The closest city to my house that has public charging ports in 16 miles away, and they only have a couple of ports. The next closest town that has them is 40 miles away, and they only have a couple as well.
Rural areas are a concern, for sure. Surprisingly, the small city I live near (Placerville, population about 12,000) has three charging stations. But then, this is California so I can imagine that in some states, rural charging stations are a ways off.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I have a rechargeable lawn mower, weed whacker and leaf blower, next year it will be a cordless chainsaw, holy shit are they nice. I like the worx brand…the batteries are all interchangeable. I hate gas mowers…noisy and fucking stinky.
Fantastic! I really would love to say goodby to "noisy and fucking stinky" gas powered shit like that!
It’s definitely the way to go when doing yard work. And the price is not all that much more than a gas mower…
I have a rechargeable lawn mower, weed whacker and leaf blower, next year it will be a cordless chainsaw, holy shit are they nice. I like the worx brand…the batteries are all interchangeable. I hate gas mowers…noisy and fucking stinky.
It's a great idea, and it's something which should be done to all gas vehicles, after sufficient investment in e-infrastructure.
Ironically, the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify for recharging electric vehicles, are the oil companies. And the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify to manufacturing electric vehicles, are the auto companies. Brave moves like Ford's will catalyze the demand for recharging stations, which hopefully proliferate quickly so the auto industry can jump on the Ford bandwagon. Seems to me in the case of climate change, business-led progress is a carrot, while government-led progress is a stick.
The oil companies are starting to add electric charging stations. As the need grows, so will the infrastructure. The oil companies like making money, so it’s safe to assume they transition as the need is there. We are along ways off from banning ICE vehicles, unless you plan on buying electric vehicles for low income and poor folks…because that’s will be a big challenge…affordability.
I have a rechargeable lawn mower, weed whacker and leaf blower, next year it will be a cordless chainsaw, holy shit are they nice. I like the worx brand…the batteries are all interchangeable. I hate gas mowers…noisy and fucking stinky.
It's a great idea, and it's something which should be done to all gas vehicles, after sufficient investment in e-infrastructure.
Ironically, the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify for recharging electric vehicles, are the oil companies. And the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify to manufacturing electric vehicles, are the auto companies. Brave moves like Ford's will catalyze the demand for recharging stations, which hopefully proliferate quickly so the auto industry can jump on the Ford bandwagon. Seems to me in the case of climate change, business-led progress is a carrot, while government-led progress is a stick.
That will be the key. In bigger cities there are already some charging stations, but once you get out in the rural areas, it is non existent. The closest city to my house that has public charging ports in 16 miles away, and they only have a couple of ports. The next closest town that has them is 40 miles away, and they only have a couple as well.
That’s a big problem that will be problematic…Canada is a great big country, low population…
I took a road trip out west from southern Ontario and the cell phone reception in many areas was spotty at best, I can just imagine how spotty charging stations will be on that same route…we went great distance between gas stations.
I have a rechargeable lawn mower, weed whacker and leaf blower, next year it will be a cordless chainsaw, holy shit are they nice. I like the worx brand…the batteries are all interchangeable. I hate gas mowers…noisy and fucking stinky.
It's a great idea, and it's something which should be done to all gas vehicles, after sufficient investment in e-infrastructure.
Ironically, the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify for recharging electric vehicles, are the oil companies. And the companies with the best existing infrastructure to modify to manufacturing electric vehicles, are the auto companies. Brave moves like Ford's will catalyze the demand for recharging stations, which hopefully proliferate quickly so the auto industry can jump on the Ford bandwagon. Seems to me in the case of climate change, business-led progress is a carrot, while government-led progress is a stick.
That will be the key. In bigger cities there are already some charging stations, but once you get out in the rural areas, it is non existent. The closest city to my house that has public charging ports in 16 miles away, and they only have a couple of ports. The next closest town that has them is 40 miles away, and they only have a couple as well.
Rural areas are a concern, for sure. Surprisingly, the small city I live near (Placerville, population about 12,000) has three charging stations. But then, this is California so I can imagine that in some states, rural charging stations are a ways off.
Don't forget that unlike a gas vehicle, which requires you to go to a gas station to refill, you can trickle charge at home. I'm three hours north of Toronto, about four hours from Ottawa, and when my friend comes in her Tesla, she plugs it into our standard wall outlet, and she's good to get back to Ottawa three days later. If we had a 240V connection available, she could've used that and she could've left in ten hours, I believe.
I'm not saying this is perfect, but I do believe that the rural issues can and will be mitigated, as will cost concerns as the volume of production increases and the climate regulations inevitably become more stringent.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,293
Will this finally quell the senseless blather of global warming deniers? Perhaps not, but it does a good job of illustrating how pointless it is to argue with them:
‘Case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans
Trawl of 90,000 studies finds consensus, leading to call for Facebook and Twitter to curb disinformation
The scientific consensus that humans are altering
the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the
case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.
The
degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is
now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics,
the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related
studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that
burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating
the planet and causing more extreme weather.
A
previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991
and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s
climate.
This has been updated and expanded by the study by
Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has
diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between
fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.
The
latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to
November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers
examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only
found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused
by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies
for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and
“cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.
The authors said their study, published on Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, showed scepticism among experts is now vanishingly small.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
No anger here. You are not stopping global warming.. the carbon tax is the greatest scam perpetrated by the government.
On the bright side it's a beautiful day here in Southern Ontario...just cut my grass. Our winters here are definitely shorter, but that's a good thing...Canada has too much winter.
Will this finally quell the senseless blather of global warming deniers? Perhaps not, but it does a good job of illustrating how pointless it is to argue with them:
‘Case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans
Trawl of 90,000 studies finds consensus, leading to call for Facebook and Twitter to curb disinformation
The scientific consensus that humans are altering
the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the
case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.
The
degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is
now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics,
the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related
studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that
burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating
the planet and causing more extreme weather.
A
previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991
and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s
climate.
This has been updated and expanded by the study by
Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has
diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between
fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.
The
latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to
November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers
examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only
found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused
by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies
for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and
“cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.
The authors said their study, published on Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, showed scepticism among experts is now vanishingly small.
Of course we are But we are past the point of return and obviously we are too dumb a species to stop over population…people use vast amounts of resources in todays society…and I doubt that is changing ever, it will only get worse…I’m just here for the ride at this point…enjoy life.
Give Peas A Chance…
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,293
Will this finally quell the senseless blather of global warming deniers? Perhaps not, but it does a good job of illustrating how pointless it is to argue with them:
‘Case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans
Trawl of 90,000 studies finds consensus, leading to call for Facebook and Twitter to curb disinformation
The scientific consensus that humans are altering
the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the
case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.
The
degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is
now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics,
the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related
studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that
burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating
the planet and causing more extreme weather.
A
previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991
and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s
climate.
This has been updated and expanded by the study by
Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has
diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between
fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.
The
latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to
November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers
examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only
found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused
by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies
for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and
“cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.
The authors said their study, published on Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, showed scepticism among experts is now vanishingly small.
Of course we are But we are past the point of return and obviously we are too dumb a species to stop over population…people use vast amounts of resources in todays society…and I doubt that is changing ever, it will only get worse…I’m just here for the ride at this point…enjoy life.
So it sounds like your solution is "party on" and don't waist time doing your part. Doesn't it make sense to at least do your little bit to help? Or support those who have a larger voice (i.e. organizations like Natural Resources Defense Council and Sea Shepherd conservation Society) and do make a difference? Otherwise, why bother talking about this subject? I don't get it. Or is it just about being angry at the world? Oh, I get that! Believe me, I've done plenty of that. But seriously, that's just a fucking waste of time and energy of we don't turn our anger into useful or creative energy.
"Anger is an energy" -John Lydon
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Will this finally quell the senseless blather of global warming deniers? Perhaps not, but it does a good job of illustrating how pointless it is to argue with them:
‘Case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans
Trawl of 90,000 studies finds consensus, leading to call for Facebook and Twitter to curb disinformation
The scientific consensus that humans are altering
the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the
case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.
The
degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is
now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics,
the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related
studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that
burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating
the planet and causing more extreme weather.
A
previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991
and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s
climate.
This has been updated and expanded by the study by
Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has
diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between
fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.
The
latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to
November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers
examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only
found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused
by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies
for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and
“cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.
The authors said their study, published on Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, showed scepticism among experts is now vanishingly small.
Of course we are But we are past the point of return and obviously we are too dumb a species to stop over population…people use vast amounts of resources in todays society…and I doubt that is changing ever, it will only get worse…I’m just here for the ride at this point…enjoy life.
So it sounds like your solution is "party on" and don't waist time doing your part. Doesn't it make sense to at least do your little bit to help? Or support those who have a larger voice (i.e. organizations like Natural Resources Defense Council and Sea Shepherd conservation Society) and do make a difference? Otherwise, why bother talking about this subject? I don't get it. Or is it just about being angry at the world? Oh, I get that! Believe me, I've done plenty of that. But seriously, that's just a fucking waste of time and energy of we don't turn our anger into useful or creative energy.
"Anger is an energy" -John Lydon
I can guarantee I do my part. I’m just being a realist.
you do t know me. You don’t know what I do. Just like I don’t know you and as far as I know you could be blowing smoke up people ass when it comes to the environment and how much you care (I don’t believe that). But making assumptions about onr e based on these message boards seems par for the course here.
Have you taken a good look around you. Your and mine fellow citizens don’t give a shit, People who care for the environment are in the minority…
Also I was married for 25 Years, before we got married we made the decision not to have kids because there was to many people already and we wondered how earth could sustain that many people…well it looks like earth can’t afterall.
as far as I’m concerned if you think the government will solve the problem…they won’t. It will take a collective effort and plenty of cash..
Give Peas A Chance…
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,293
Will this finally quell the senseless blather of global warming deniers? Perhaps not, but it does a good job of illustrating how pointless it is to argue with them:
‘Case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans
Trawl of 90,000 studies finds consensus, leading to call for Facebook and Twitter to curb disinformation
The scientific consensus that humans are altering
the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the
case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.
The
degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is
now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics,
the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related
studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that
burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating
the planet and causing more extreme weather.
A
previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991
and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s
climate.
This has been updated and expanded by the study by
Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has
diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between
fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.
The
latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to
November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers
examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only
found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused
by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies
for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and
“cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.
The authors said their study, published on Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, showed scepticism among experts is now vanishingly small.
Of course we are But we are past the point of return and obviously we are too dumb a species to stop over population…people use vast amounts of resources in todays society…and I doubt that is changing ever, it will only get worse…I’m just here for the ride at this point…enjoy life.
So it sounds like your solution is "party on" and don't waist time doing your part. Doesn't it make sense to at least do your little bit to help? Or support those who have a larger voice (i.e. organizations like Natural Resources Defense Council and Sea Shepherd conservation Society) and do make a difference? Otherwise, why bother talking about this subject? I don't get it. Or is it just about being angry at the world? Oh, I get that! Believe me, I've done plenty of that. But seriously, that's just a fucking waste of time and energy of we don't turn our anger into useful or creative energy.
"Anger is an energy" -John Lydon
I can guarantee I do my part. I’m just being a realist.
you do t know me. You don’t know what I do. Just like I don’t know you and as far as I know you could be blowing smoke up people ass when it comes to the environment and how much you care (I don’t believe that). But making assumptions about onr e based on these message boards seems par for the course here.
Have you taken a good look around you. Your and mine fellow citizens don’t give a shit, People who care for the environment are in the minority…
Also I was married for 25 Years, before we got married we made the decision not to have kids because there was to many people already and we wondered how earth could sustain that many people…well it looks like earth can’t afterall.
as far as I’m concerned if you think the government will solve the problem…they won’t. It will take a collective effort and plenty of cash..
I agree that things are not looking good and that too many people don't care. What I'm trying to say is that that is no reason for you and I to not care. A good number of people with a lot more pull than you and I are still out there working to help the environment, fighting for the earth. They put out energy and time doing that in ways overshadows anything I can do. We can support those efforts. I don't see any point in being defeatist about hoping we can at least help lessen the effect of global warming. And maybe there is reason to not hold a lot of hope that the government is going to solve the problem, but I am going to continue to ask them to do so. The more letter and phone calls they get, the more likely they will take some action. Have you written or called your government? Maybe that wold be more constructive than coming here time and again and basically saying "we're fucked". Let's do what makes sense instead of being to defeatist.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
I see the pm of Canada is going to some climate conference…that a boy. The best way to flight climate change is for a bunch of elitist hypocrites hopping on jets and burning fuel…lmfao.
and these clowns wonder why less and less people care…
I see the pm of Canada is going to some climate conference…that a boy. The best way to flight climate change is for a bunch of elitist hypocrites hopping on jets and burning fuel…lmfao.
and these clowns wonder why less and less people care…
You seem to have lots of opinions of which actions are inappropriate for leaders to take. Do you have any ideas of what would be appropriate, or are you just here to shit on leaders relentlessly?
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
The only solution to automobiles is better rail and more rail options.
where I live in southern Ontario my town and a bunch of other smaller towns were all connected by rail…the tracks have been removed and converted to multi purpose pathways.
in southern Ontario all we do is expand highways and then we fill them up again. And highways are expensive and hard on the environment.
I wish in Ontario we’d adopt a policy of no new highways or highway expansion and invest that money to start building and linking smaller communities with rail, plus it just makes commons sense with an aging population. My 87 year old father often needs to go for specialized medical 90 minutes away…he wishes rail was an option..Fortunately I can take him, but many seniors are fucked.
LOL. How many of you do I offset with needing 200 gallons of gas/week just for my boat? Add my SUVs, sideXside, snowmobiles. And your dreaded gas leaf blower. But don't worry, I use reusable straws.
0
brianlux
Moving through All Kinds of Terrain. Posts: 42,293
LOL. How many of you do I offset with needing 200 gallons of gas/week just for my boat? Add my SUVs, sideXside, snowmobiles. And your dreaded gas leaf blower. But don't worry, I use reusable straws.
LOL, what a card. Enjoy your mindless trolling.
"Pretty cookies, heart squares all around, yeah!" -Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
The only solution to automobiles is better rail and more rail options.
where I live in southern Ontario my town and a bunch of other smaller towns were all connected by rail…the tracks have been removed and converted to multi purpose pathways.
in southern Ontario all we do is expand highways and then we fill them up again. And highways are expensive and hard on the environment.
I wish in Ontario we’d adopt a policy of no new highways or highway expansion and invest that money to start building and linking smaller communities with rail, plus it just makes commons sense with an aging population. My 87 year old father often needs to go for specialized medical 90 minutes away…he wishes rail was an option..Fortunately I can take him, but many seniors are fucked.
I agree with you here (and actually think even more parts of Canada could leverage this). I think this would also be a major economic boom, and could potentially catalyze some new urban centres across the country. For young people who want the urban life, the promise of access to urban life makes the more affordable rural living much more compelling.
'05 - TO, '06 - TO 1, '08 - NYC 1 & 2, '09 - TO, Chi 1 & 2, '10 - Buffalo, NYC 1 & 2, '11 - TO 1 & 2, Hamilton, '13 - Buffalo, Brooklyn 1 & 2, '15 - Global Citizen, '16 - TO 1 & 2, Chi 2
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Comments
Rural areas are a concern, for sure. Surprisingly, the small city I live near (Placerville, population about 12,000) has three charging stations. But then, this is California so I can imagine that in some states, rural charging stations are a ways off.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Prince William says great minds should focus on saving Earth not space travel
I took a road trip out west from southern Ontario and the cell phone reception in many areas was spotty at best, I can just imagine how spotty charging stations will be on that same route…we went great distance between gas stations.
I'm not saying this is perfect, but I do believe that the rural issues can and will be mitigated, as will cost concerns as the volume of production increases and the climate regulations inevitably become more stringent.
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
Good, Good, give into your anger.
‘Case closed’: 99.9% of scientists agree climate emergency caused by humans
Trawl of 90,000 studies finds consensus, leading to call for Facebook and Twitter to curb disinformation
The scientific consensus that humans are altering the climate has passed 99.9%, according to research that strengthens the case for global action at the Cop26 summit in Glasgow.
The degree of scientific certainty about the impact of greenhouse gases is now similar to the level of agreement on evolution and plate tectonics, the authors say, based on a survey of nearly 90,000 climate-related studies. This means there is practically no doubt among experts that burning fossil fuels, such as oil, gas, coal, peat and trees, is heating the planet and causing more extreme weather.
A previous survey in 2013 showed 97% of studies published between 1991 and 2012 supported the idea that human activities are altering Earth’s climate.
This has been updated and expanded by the study by Cornell University that shows the tiny minority of sceptical voices has diminished to almost nothing as evidence mounts of the link between fossil-fuel burning and climate disruption.
The latest survey of peer-reviewed literature published from 2012 to November 2020 was conducted in two stages. First, the researchers examined a random sample of 3,000 studies, in which they found only found four papers that were sceptical that the climate crisis was caused by humans. Second, they searched the full database of 88,125 studies for keywords linked to climate scepticism such as “natural cycles” and “cosmic rays”, which yielded 28 papers, all published in minor journals.
The authors said their study, published on Tuesday in the journal Environmental Research Letters, showed scepticism among experts is now vanishingly small.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
On the bright side it's a beautiful day here in Southern Ontario...just cut my grass. Our winters here are definitely shorter, but that's a good thing...Canada has too much winter.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
you do t know me. You don’t know what I do. Just like I don’t know you and as far as I know you could be blowing smoke up people ass when it comes to the environment and how much you care (I don’t believe that). But making assumptions about onr
e based on these message boards seems par for the course here.
Have you taken a good look around you. Your and mine fellow citizens don’t give a shit, People who care for the environment are in the minority…
Also I was married for 25 Years, before we got married we made the decision not to have kids because there was to many people already and we wondered how earth could sustain that many people…well it looks like earth can’t afterall.
as far as I’m concerned if you think the government will solve the problem…they won’t. It will take a collective effort and plenty of cash..
I agree that things are not looking good and that too many people don't care. What I'm trying to say is that that is no reason for you and I to not care. A good number of people with a lot more pull than you and I are still out there working to help the environment, fighting for the earth. They put out energy and time doing that in ways overshadows anything I can do. We can support those efforts. I don't see any point in being defeatist about hoping we can at least help lessen the effect of global warming.
And maybe there is reason to not hold a lot of hope that the government is going to solve the problem, but I am going to continue to ask them to do so. The more letter and phone calls they get, the more likely they will take some action. Have you written or called your government? Maybe that wold be more constructive than coming here time and again and basically saying "we're fucked".
Let's do what makes sense instead of being to defeatist.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
and these clowns wonder why less and less people care…
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1
30,000 are gathering for COP26 in a pandemic. What could go wrong?
Did they walk.
Nope. Just your typical hypocrites.
Your current vehicle (truck, or Jeep, right?) isn't already enough to indicate you don't give a shit about climate change? Interesting.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
"I also am not giving up my creature comforts".
hahahaha
-EV 8/14/93
Got it!
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
Plans for high-speed rail between Dallas and Fort Worth, with a stop in Arlington, move forward
where I live in southern Ontario my town and a bunch of other smaller towns were all connected by rail…the tracks have been removed and converted to multi purpose pathways.
in southern Ontario all we do is expand highways and then we fill them up again. And highways are expensive and hard on the environment.
-Eddie Vedder, "Smile"
GOLDSTEIN: PM heads into UN climate conference boasting big spending but few results
EV
Toronto Film Festival 9/11/2007, '08 - Toronto 1 & 2, '09 - Albany 1, '11 - Chicago 1