Reduce your carbon footprint by starving a family — 23 Comments

  1. I might be completely missing something here but surely people who are genuinely concerned about the environment and their carbon footprint would be the last people driving SUVs?

    Are their really people who drivve SUVs and waffle on about carbgon footprint? Surely not? If so, they should go top of your shooitng list Grandad.

  2. Third reason: Emerging economies are now in a position to purchase more food. Where people once subsisted, many are now eating well or even over eating (like those in the US and Europe). Supply and demand.

  3. John B – That should be an AND/OR. The whole damn world seems to be on about carbon footprints, and I’m sure a hell of a lot of them drive SUVs. Look at the worst example on the planet – Al Gore.

    The only carbon footprint I worry about is the one I leave on the carpet after sweeping the chimney.

  4. Sneezy – That’s very true. But as the demand increases, so should the supply, and it seems strange [to put it mildly] to turn good agricultural land over to growing fuel rather than food.

  5. the only carbon footprint i worry about is the one I leave on the carpet after sweeping the chimney


    After careful consideration of this over the last while I have to admit I’m with you sir on many levels over this.

    Granted the weather has changed in the past few years, but blaming everything on ‘global warming’ without considerable scientific proof is pushing it a bit far. I’m a bit concerned about all the industries that have sprung up around it. Admittedly some are by people who have a genuine love of and wish to change the world for the better, but there’s also a lot of money being made somewhere.

    People point to horrendous events like the Burmese cyclone or the Chinese earthquake as sure signs of the decay of the planet. I doubt it. I think it’s rather the prevalence of the media and the use of the internet that means that events that may have only become known to the world months after are now reported on the same day. It’s not that they weren’t happening, we just weren’t hearing about them.

    I think there’s a choice we have though, and it’s doubtless one that the more sensible of us have been doing for years anyways – recycling, not burning toxic materials, not polluting the streams and rivers with effluent, compost bins and so on. I wish more parents would teach their children not to litter and to dispose of rubbish carefully. I also wish the facilities to take more care of the environment were provided by the councils and state, but hopefully this will happen as we become better educated.

    You made great points in that post sir!

  6. Darragh – I don’t know how anyone can conceivably blame an earthquake on Global Warming [though no doubt they do]. I agree with you 100%. These events have always occurred, but we have such easy access to news events now that we are far more aware of them.

    I too don’t believe in wastage. I recycle as much as possible and I dispose of as little as possible – it’s only common sense. Also I believe in cutting down on my fuel bills because it is simple economy.

    From infancy, I was taught not to litter, and my pockets are always full of papers and other rubbish which I dispose of tidily. I am fastidious about disposing of tourists.

    Most of the things that Eco-Freaks propose are common sense anyway, but some of them are not only counter productive but are actually causing grave damage to the health of the planet.

  7. Grandad, didn’t you know every thing is to be blamed on global warming but since no one can agree on whether we’re going to melt the polar ice caps or start another ice age, we now must call it, ‘global climate change’.
    Personally I couldn’t give two pooplets about my carbon footprint. It’s all political, not scientific.

  8. Whether or not carbon emissions contribute to global warming it’s rapidly becoming evident that ethanol and other plant based fuels aren’t efficient. Of course corn really isn’t that efficient as a food in general. Thanks to government subsidies we have a plethora of corn syrup and other corn products which are doing little good and much harm.

    There are better and smarter ways to be good to our environment (which should be a priority). Just like anything good though you can have too much of it.


  9. I initially liked the idea of biofuel when it was a case of “Hey I can sneak a few litres of lidl cooking oil into my tank and fuck the excise, cool!”. Now people actually see it as an alternative. Idiots.

    You are glossing over one point. Why will we need more food in 2030? More people. Everyone is running around waving their hands about sustainable living when we have well overshot a sensible population (aided by the easy energy of oil that is now busy drying up). We are no longer sustainable as a species, we just haven’t realised it yet.

    So if you want to properly reduce the carbon footprint of the species as a whole, reduce the population. Oh, but that is contrary to the economic growth imperative isn’t it? I say fair fucks to the French and Germans for having a declining population.

    Oh and Samantha can bloody well cycle.

  10. Its true Grandad.
    It pains me to see the hypocritical attitudes of people who say they ‘doing their bit for Global warming’…what the hell does that mean anyway?.These are the people who have those massive trampolines in their gardens instead of a small veggie patch I can heartily recommend the latter btw) and drive their enormous cars to the bottle bank and on discovering that the bottle bank is full, simply leave their bottles beside the bin and piss off.
    Mr Isit? saw one family group at the local recycle centre on Saturday..he was about to drive away having discovered that the bins were full (taking our MANY wine bottles home with him) when he spotted them..kiddies in the backseat watching the parents while they unloaded their green bags full of mine bottles onto the pavement and just drove away…These guys are local green campaigners…I ask you?.

  11. Brianf – That is a classic list but it would take too long to read ’em all! As yousay – in the 70’s we were heading into an Ice Age, and now we are heading into the furnace. When are they going to wake up?

    Thrifty – You are, of course, right [as always]. What we need to do to solve all problems is to re-elect Bush for another fifty years, so that he can wipe out half the world’s population. I’m sure he’ll find a handy excuse.

  12. Isitjustme – Being ‘Green’ is just a fashion statement these days. They are like to people who drive a quarter mile to the nearest gym, so they can spend a fortune walking half a mile on a treadmill. They just can’t see the irony.

  13. Finally a sane suggestion 🙂 Mind you I’m running a fever so sanity is not my strong point.

  14. I came by this morning to let you know I had linked to you…but you have already discovered that. I hope you don’t mind.

    I, myself, am not at all convinced of the reason for global warming, though logic would indicate that billions of tons of gasses have to go somewhere. Global warming aside, though, I can’t agree with you strongly enough about the idiocy of biofuel and the SUV drivers who can’t keep out of their vehicles for an hour at a time.

    Talking of Samantha, I recently read some stat about school children – to the effect of 25 years ago 30% of kids were driven to school. Now, it’s over 90%.

    Edit: By the way – your comment on HSBoots was like a celebrity sighting.

  15. Hi Shannon. Of course I don’t mind. I’m flattered! 🙂

    I have grave doubts about Al Gore and his ‘Inconvenient Truth’. I watched the film with an open mind, and I was horrified by it – not by the content, but by the incredibly biased, non-scientific way the information was portrayed. As I said in a previous post – you could sail the entire American Navy through the holes in his arguments.

    You would be much too young [says he at his flattering best!] to remember the 70s, when the scientific community had grave fears that we were heading into an Ice-Age? They wanted to coat the ice-caps with carbon, to absorb sunlight. If they had done that, where would we be now?

    I would well believe the 90% figure. In my day, it was 0%. But that was a while ago. 😉

    your comment on HSBoots was like a celebrity sighting

  16. I haven’t seen “Inconvenient Truth” but I’ve heard of it. It sounds more like flag-waving and whining about ballots than anything else.

    I don’t actually pay too much attention to American politicians as a rule. But I still try not to drive my car very often – whether petroleum consumption is to blame or not.

    And you know, you have this very glamourous image you portray here on Head Rambles – I couldn’t help but be all in a tizzy that you came round my blog. You’re like a cranky, bearded, funnier George Clooney.

  17. Shannon – “Inconvenient Truth” is nothing more than a documentary showing us how great and wonderful Al Gore is. It is heavily biased, misleading and in places deceitful. How it won an Oscar is completely baffling!!

    I too drive my car very little. It’s a simple matter of economics! 😐

    A glamourous image? Hah! I haven’t heard that one before. I’m flattered. You make me sound like one of those ghastly celebrity types. 😮

    I’m only an old fart with an axe or two to grind, and a sometimes obscure outlook on life. Sorry!

  18. Now I’m all disillusioned.

    By the way, I find this very funny: your Google ads are cheerily inviting me to “click here and find out how to reduce your carbon footprint” and “Let us help reduce your greenhouse gas emissions and carbon footprint”.

    Tell you what – I’ll click ’em for you, make you a few pennies.

  19. I love those Google ads. They nearly always advertise something I’m giving out about. I did a few posts about the benefits of pipe smoking and, of course the anti-smoking ads all appeared on cue.

  20. kudos to you on this post –

    I think one of the more sane posts, etc.. But then and again, it may just be because I agree with you & everyone else is wrong

  21. Shh! You’re not allowed question the Blessed Bio-Fuels. Or you’ll be eaten by crazed hippies.

    Of course, the damn things aren’t even particularly environmentally friendly; they don’t really have that low of a ‘carbon footprint’. But the only legitimate low CO2 power source we have right now is nuclear, and if there’s one thing environmentalists like less than things which actually harm the environment, it’s nuclear power.

    If it’s any consolation, support for biofuels, especially those derived from food crops, has been plummeting lately as people realise that they’re impractical. I believe that the EU is about to scrap its biofuel goals, for instance.

Hosted by Curratech Blog Hosting