Australia Fire storm.

[Stylo]

This event has to be the worst ever and I feel for the guys over there. Talked to my cousin today, he lives near Canberra .

Everything stinks of smoke , the sky is red ...

[toycollector10]

Whatever you think about the cause(s) of this tragedy, global warming, poor management etc this video might be of interest. Feel free to flame me (no pun intended). Other people have because I shared it on social media. Apparently, having a different opinion is a thought crime now. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B_tn8f0uaB4

[ellipsis]

...you can't deny the truth, and that's exactly what this is...

[Owl]

I quite enjoyed that video. I even had a giggle.:laugh:

[caseye]

I quite enjoyed that video. I even had a giggle.:laugh:

As did I!
Idiots, the lot of em.

[sidecar bob]

I saw a clip of Piers Morgan on UK TV a couple of nights ago saying that the Australian PM was completely stupid & in denial for not accepting that it was all the fault of climate change.
Apparently if you're not buying the whole idea you are the enemy of the people.

[MaxPenguin]

Fuck wrong link...

[MaxPenguin]

The guy in the YouTube echo chamber link is a fucked dick and knows fuck all. Climate change deniers rank lower than flatearthers.

[austingtir]

I saw a clip of Piers Morgan on UK TV a couple of nights ago saying that the Australian PM was completely stupid & in denial for not accepting that it was all the fault of climate change.
Apparently if you're not buying the whole idea you are the enemy of the people.

Yeah I saw that too. And since I have seen a handful of highly edited clips online of Piers interviewing other people with the same clearly scripted bullshit.

Someone need to send Alex Jones over there to sort that clown out!



Climate change people are legit cultists the way they are acting about all this is absurd.

[JimO]

The guy in the YouTube echo chamber link is a fucked dick and knows fuck all. Climate change deniers rank lower than flatearthers.
suuuuuuuuuuure, climate always changing, man has fuck all to do with it, you and greta can go suck a bag of dicks

[sidecar bob]

The guy in the YouTube echo chamber link is a fucked dick and knows fuck all. Climate change deniers rank lower than flatearthers.

You're probably not old enough to remember that we were all going to die in the '70's when the USA or Russia pressed some magic button somewhere.
They really had the gullible & stupid believing that the whole world could be ended by some bloke pressing presumably a red button.
I imagine it would have had one of those little flip down covers currently favoured by boy racers, to prevent it being deployed by accident.

[Jeeper]

You're probably not old enough to remember that we were all going to die in the '70's when the USA or Russia pressed some magic button somewhere.
They really had the gullible & stupid believing that the whole world could be ended by some bloke pressing presumably a red button.
I imagine it would have had one of those little flip down covers currently favoured by boy racers, to prevent it being deployed by accident.I thought it was the SkyLab falling back to Earth.

[Owl]

you and greta can go suck a bag of dicks

I had planned to stay home tomorrow and not ride my bike. I thought I may restore Greta's childhood and dreams with my empty tank.:yes:

[sidecar bob]

I thought it was the SkyLab falling back to Earth.

Yes, 1979 as I recall. It was probably around the size of a dump truck, I'm sure it would have put paid to all life on earth.
There was also a thing where all the planets were going to line up & that was going to pull earth off its orbit & fuck us up somehow too. That was around the same time, or a little earlier.

[Katman]

Yes, 1979 as I recall. It was probably around the size of a dump truck, I'm sure it would have put paid to all life on earth.
There was also a thing where all the planets were going to line up & that was going to pull earth off its orbit & fuck us up somehow too. That was around the same time, or a little earlier.

Hey, there's always World War 3 to look forward to.

[mashman]

suuuuuuuuuuure, climate always changing, man has fuck all to do with it, you and greta can go suck a bag of dicks

You might not wanna look into the effects of deforestation on weather patterns and the associated effects on the climate. Especially if you're out of bags of dicks.

[Katman]

I haven't made up my mind yet about this whole 'climate change' issue.

I'm immediately suspicious of anything that becomes the mainstream media's cause celebre.

[sidecar bob]

I haven't made up my mind yet about this whole 'climate change' issue.

I'm immediately suspicious of anything that becomes the mainstream media's cause celebre.

We agree on something there. it's all a bit brand new too, I don't recall it being the trendy thing even four years ago.

[Jeeper]

Half the time they can't even forecast weather correctly, let alone forecast long term climate changes. There are too many variables and unknowns. I'm not likely to be around for 2100, hopefully I make it to 2050/60. Let's see what flavor is the next decade.

[sidecar bob]

Half the time they can't even forecast weather correctly, let alone forecast long term climate changes. There are too many variables and unknowns. I'm not likely to be around for 2100, hopefully I make it to 2050/60. Let's see what flavor is the next decade.

Remember how quaint "Millenium Fever" was?
They had a field day with the gullible then too.

[Katman]

We agree on something there. it's all a bit brand new too, I don't recall it being the trendy thing even four years ago.

And I place environmental issues as one of my top considerations when voting.

So I don't question the fact that we're treating this planet like shit and polluting the fuck out of it.

But I'm convinced that someone's winning out of this whole 'climate change' thing, who shouldn't be winning.

[mashman]

I haven't made up my mind yet about this whole 'climate change' issue.

I'm immediately suspicious of anything that becomes the mainstream media's cause celebre.

The climate changes. Human beings need some form of resource resilience to minimise the interruptions that come with natural or man made events. Whether man made or not, it happens. Before human beings (in any great numbers) trees ran from coast to coast and would have produced fire and air quality that is mind boggling to consider, but it does explain species die offs and how the ocean "decarbons" itself following some cataclysmic event. The trees that grow back then help scrub the atmosphere and ocean. That's the natural cycle of things.

Man is the same forest fire, except the trees don't get to grow back to anywhere near the size that they were (sequestering less co2 along the way), and nowhere near in the numbers that used to exist given the economic behaviour that has seen that land paved and farmed and mined etc...

Therefore:

There is evidence for natural climate change.
There is evidence for man made climate change.

All that is then left to discuss is how we prepare for climate change irrespective of how it is driven... or indeed take the politically expedient approach and bury ones head in the sand, coz that is exponentially easier than arguing over the causes of climate change when we clearly intend to do nothing about it. There's an irony or two in there somewhere........

[Jeeper]

Remember how quaint "Millenium Fever" was?
They had a field day with the gullible then too.Yes, I do remember. Don't fly on 01/01/2000, planes might not operate properly. Don't drive, even though my car had as much computer staff as a golf club. My toaster did stop working that day though, hmmm.

[Katman]

Therefore:

There is evidence for natural climate change.
There is evidence for man made climate change.

And it was your comment about deforestation that suddenly helped me see a truly valid point about 'climate change' - it made me question what is the root cause of 'climate change'?

Deforestation becomes the root cause.

I still don't think 'climate change' is the catastrophe that it's being portrayed as though.

I just wish we'd clean the place up some.

[Jeeper]

And it was your comment about deforestation that suddenly helped me see a truly valid point about 'climate change' - except I question whether 'climate change' is the root cause.

Deforestation becomes the root cause.But then deforestation is caused by the need for more cultivatable land for increasing human population.

[Katman]

But then deforestation is caused by the need for more cultivatable land for increasing human population.

No it's not.

It's caused by greed.

[Jeeper]

No it's not.

It's caused by greed.Explain your logic?

[FJRider]

Explain your logic?

Bigger farms ... more money you can make ... and the higher value your land becomes.

[Jeeper]

Bigger farms ... more money you can make ... and the higher the value of your land becomes.Why do you need bigger farm? And the value will not increase unless it is profitable. Bigger production from bigger farms is to meet bigger demand from population.

Now it's a different equation if you say the farm is bigger for lifestyle reasons because you would rather have a 10 acre lawn than a 200 sq meter one.

[Katman]

Explain your logic?

The greed that causes people to clear forests to dig shit out of the ground.

The greed that causes people to clear forests to plant way more palm tree plantations than the world ever needs.

It's the same greed that sees us pulling fossil fuels out of the ground faster than we're ever going to need them.

[FJRider]

Why do you need bigger farm? And the value will not increase unless it is profitable. Bigger production from bigger farms is to meet bigger demand from population.

Now it's a different equation if you say the farm is bigger for lifestyle reasons because you would rather have a 10 acre lawn than a 200 sq meter one.

"Need" never enters the equation. Buy cheap forested property. Clear it and sell it ... at a large profit. No farming experience needed.

Usual business practice.

[Katman]

And while the ferocity of these fires is most likely due to the excessive heat that has been experienced over there already this summer, humans are still the principle contributor to their occurrence - not climate change.

[husaberg]

The greed that causes people to clear forests to dig shit out of the ground.

The greed that causes people to clear forests to plant way more palm tree plantations than the world ever needs.

It's the same greed that sees us pulling fossil fuels out of the ground faster than we're ever going to need them.

Is that that same greed that sees you consume more bikes than you need?
So you also Live in a house with with no more bedrooms than you have people needing beds , I assume you are also not consuming any of these naughty goods as a protest and have forsaken all luxuries including alcohol coffee chocolate and illicit drugs.
Plus your vehicle are strictly for necessity use, rather than pleasure and run on bio-fuel grown exclusively in your backyard.

[Jeeper]

So what's your solution for greed?

To me greed in vacuum cannot be sustained, there has to be demand for whatever you are peddling. If the demand doesn't exist, you create it. One of the natural ways of increased demand is increasing number of mouths to feed or bodies to be charged around (burning such dug up fuel). If you dig up fuel without demand for it, there is no real profit to be had for the greed satisfaction (that's why OPEC reduces supply when prices drop).

Fundamental component for me is the ever increasing humans on this Earth, compounded by everyone wanting to have the next best toy available. Throwaway culture and over population.

[Katman]

…..


And here he is.

[austingtir]

And while the ferocity of these fires is most likely due to the excessive heat that has been experienced over there already this summer, humans are still the principle contributor to their occurrence - not climate change.


Yeah the 186 (that they've actually CAUGHT!!!) that lit the fires are the issue.

If Scott Morrison is smart he should launch the biggest criminal investigation in Australia's history and round all these people up.... But he wont.


I mean its not difficult to assume if they've CAUGHT 186 people then theres probably a shit load more than that actually responsible.

[FJRider]

There is evidence for natural climate change.
There is evidence for man made climate change.

All that is then left to discuss is how we prepare for climate change irrespective of how it is driven... or indeed take the politically expedient approach and bury ones head in the sand, coz that is exponentially easier than arguing over the causes of climate change when we clearly intend to do nothing about it. There's an irony or two in there somewhere........

With an increasing human population ... an increasing need to feed and clothe them .... plus the effect that increase in population has on our planet.

Our simple survival is at risk. Simple solution ... reduce the numbers. Volunteers might be needed to slow the changes ... :shutup:

[Jeeper]

With an increasing human population ... an increasing need to feed and clothe them .... plus the effect that increase in population has on our planet.

Our simple survival is at risk. Simple solution ... reduce the numbers. Volunteers might be needed to slow the changes ... :shutup:Don't forget longer life expectancy as well. People are living much longer than they were 100 years ago.

[Katman]

Don't forget longer life expectancy as well. People are living much longer than they were 100 years ago.

I'm fairly sure the chemicals they're pumping into our foods and environment these days will take care of that trend.

[MaxPenguin]

And while the ferocity of these fires is most likely due to the excessive heat that has been experienced over there already this summer, humans are still the principle contributor to their occurrence - not climate change.

Yes the dickheads started the fires, but putting them out is now a bigger problem than it ever was.

[MaxPenguin]

You're probably not old enough to remember that we were all going to die in the '70's when the USA or Russia pressed some magic button somewhere.
They really had the gullible & stupid believing that the whole world could be ended by some bloke pressing presumably a red button.
I imagine it would have had one of those little flip down covers currently favoured by boy racers, to prevent it being deployed by accident.

I do remember it, thanks for thinking I am young.

Red button is a different scenario than the climate change/ environmental crisis though. It is happening and the thing that breaks my heart the most is the habitat destruction, it's just not fair. Humans need to stop thinking we are the supreme beings on this rock.

[Jeeper]

I'm fairly sure the chemicals they're pumping into our foods and environment these days will take care of that trend.So the planet will strike a natural equilibrium on population over time for what is sustainable and not? Increased natural catastrophes will reduce the population naturally to a level that is workable. How long will it take though?

[Jeeper]

I do remember it, thanks for thinking I am young.

Red button is a different scenario than the climate change/ environmental crisis though. It is happening and the thing that breaks my heart the most is the habitat destruction, it's just not fair. Humans need to stop thinking we are the supreme beings on this rock.Yup, fairly selfish view of the world. Resources are just for humans to consume, including all the animals and plants.

[MaxPenguin]

So the planet will strike a natural equilibrium on population over time for what is sustainable and not? Increased natural catastrophes will reduce the population naturally to a level that is workable. How long will it take though?

Yeah but by that stage who would want to live here, there's more to earth than just what concerns humans.

[Katman]

Increased natural catastrophes will reduce the population naturally to a level that is workable. How long will it take though?

The Earth will probably decide that.

[Swoop]

"climate change" is just the latest distraction used to keep the population away from important things happening.

It seems to happen around 10yr cycles: "war on terror", "global financial crisis", "islamic terrorism", etc, etc.

Once the children are brainwashed into it, it is much simpler to manage. Greta Thunderwhotsit is a prime example of this.

[mashman]

And it was your comment about deforestation that suddenly helped me see a truly valid point about 'climate change' - it made me question what is the root cause of 'climate change'?

Deforestation becomes the root cause.

I still don't think 'climate change' is the catastrophe that it's being portrayed as though.

I just wish we'd clean the place up some.

While deforestation is natural and potentially a root cause in its own right, under the context that we're seeing it happen currently, technically it's a symptom of our financially driven land use.

Like anything really, catastrophe may well be at the end of a sequence of events that see 6 out of 7 conditions met, or it may be instantaneous because the right areas is "taken out". As such there really is no single root cause that we can do much of anything about outwith our economic activity. It mirrors nature and not in a "good" way. Nature never produced exhaust gas and allowed animals in their billions/trillions to screw whenever they liked and fart unquantifiable methane packed farts without being taxed etc..., which leaves reliable data even more open to being bullshit.

Yeah, the kids asking the adults to clean their home has a sweet ironic ring to it... especially as the adults have said no :laugh:

[mashman]

With an increasing human population ... an increasing need to feed and clothe them .... plus the effect that increase in population has on our planet.

Our simple survival is at risk. Simple solution ... reduce the numbers. Volunteers might be needed to slow the changes ... :shutup:

6.08 billion people live on 0.34 sustainable planets. I reckon the 1.52 billion that use the remaining 1.36 sustainable planets will be shaking in their boots. As such, you've already volunteered ;)... and by default I have too, which is a bit of a pisser really as I don;t believe that I'm getting good value for money :shifty:

[Katman]

While deforestation is natural and potentially a root cause in its own right, under the context that we're seeing it happen currently, technically it's a symptom of our financially driven land use.

That's why I said later, the root cause was greed.

Deforestation isn't natural - it's man made and driven by greed.

[austingtir]

6.08 billion people live on 0.34 sustainable planets. I reckon the 1.52 billion that use the remaining 1.36 sustainable planets will be shaking in their boots. As such, you've already volunteered ;)... and by default I have too, which is a bit of a pisser really as I don;t believe that I'm getting good value for money :shifty:


Fuck off with your sustainable planets rubbish already.



https://youtu.be/hjcdMU2itv8

[husaberg]

That's why I said later, the root cause was greed.

Deforestation isn't natural - it's man made and driven by greed.

So you live in the forest or do you live in a cleared area of forest "DUDE"

[Katman]

My greatest fear is that it might come out that some of these fires were started by 'climate change' activists.

That could serve genuine environmentalists a crippling blow worldwide.

[husaberg]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y9iGuXkenCA

[mashman]

Deforestation isn't natural - it's man made and driven by greed.

It is both.

[mashman]

Fuck off with your sustainable planets rubbish already.

Nah fuck it. List.

[MaxPenguin]

Fuck off with your sustainable planets rubbish already.

Fuck off...........



https://youtu.be/hjcdMU2itv8


So you live in the forest or do you live in a cleared area of forest "DUDE"

Fuck off...........

[Katman]

So you live in the forest or do you live in a cleared area of forest "DUDE"

..........


what is totally predictable is you following me around and trolling.

[TheDemonLord]

And I place environmental issues as one of my top considerations when voting.

So I don't question the fact that we're treating this planet like shit and polluting the fuck out of it.

But I'm convinced that someone's winning out of this whole 'climate change' thing, who shouldn't be winning.

Well, Fuck.

Another thing we somewhat agree on. Although, I suspect from vastly different perspectives, considering I'm in the Margaret Thatcher school of thought:


"The new dogma about climate change has swept through the left-of-centre governing classes."
...
"provides a marvellous excuse for worldwide, supra-national socialism".

Not to mention I've got textbooks from the 1970s and 1980s making all sorts of dire predictions, All that were derived by the same statistical, predictive and experimental methodologies that produced the current 'Climate Crisis' figures and all turned out to be wrong

The most frustrating thing is whilst I'm a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist:

Would I like to see less Plastics - Yes, Go invent something Bio-degradeable that does all the things (or some of the things) that Plastic Does.
Would I like to see more Green Energy - Yes, Go figure out how to make tidal flow generators that consistently work and don't break in a Storm.
Would I like to see more Electric Vehicles - Yes, Constant torque all throughout the rev range - Go invent battery technology or a system that can recharge in the same time it takes to refuel.

Give me a better alternative and like the Capitalist I am, I'll use that. Give me some piss weak alternative that works like shit but you try to prop up with 'but muh environment' and I'll tell you to fuck off.

[MaxPenguin]

Well, Fuck.

Another thing we somewhat agree on. Although, I suspect from vastly different perspectives, considering I'm in the Margaret Thatcher school of thought:



Not to mention I've got textbooks from the 1970s and 1980s making all sorts of dire predictions, All that were derived by the same statistical, predictive and experimental methodologies that produced the current 'Climate Crisis' figures and all turned out to be wrong

The most frustrating thing is whilst I'm a dyed-in-the-wool capitalist:

Would I like to see less Plastics - Yes, Go invent something Bio-degradeable that does all the things (or some of the things) that Plastic Does.
Would I like to see more Green Energy - Yes, Go figure out how to make tidal flow generators that consistently work and don't break in a Storm.
Would I like to see more Electric Vehicles - Yes, Constant torque all throughout the rev range - Go invent battery technology or a system that can recharge in the same time it takes to refuel.

Give me a better alternative and like the Capitalist I am, I'll use that. Give me some piss weak alternative that works like shit but you try to prop up with 'but muh environment' and I'll tell you to fuck off.

That's a great attitude and one that will help whatever your left/right leanings.:hug:

[Katman]

It is both.

I'm interested to know how you see deforestation as being a 'natural' phenomenon.

[mashman]

I'm interested to know how you see deforestation as being a 'natural' phenomenon.

Post #22. Should've been pretty explanatory.

[Katman]

Post #22. Should've been pretty explanatory.

Fair enough. I've always just considered the word deforestation to describe a man-made occurrence.

Yes, fires can happen naturally but the ratio of natural fires versus man-made fires is very, very lop sided.

And if we take as fact the suggestion that man-made deforestation is causing an increase in average temperatures then certainly the ferocity of a naturally occurring fire today can still be placed back in the laps of humans.

[mashman]

Fair enough. I've always just considered the word deforestation to describe a man-made occurrence.

Yes, fires can happen naturally but the ratio of natural fires versus man-made fires is very, very lop sided.

And if we take as fact the suggestion that man-made deforestation is causing an increase in average temperatures then certainly the ferocity of a naturally occurring fire today can still be placed back in the laps of humans.

It can be weird to accept that deforestation is a natural occurrence and that mans burning things falls under that heading, but it did happen before human beings. The human bit is the land clearances and feeble attempts at growing enough to replace that which is removed in the name of commerce.

It s very lopsided as there is only 1 nature lol. But yeah, stupid people set stupid fires and a minority of accidents happen that all end in the same thing. something that nature would have done, but something we have a history of covering up (with houses and farms).

Absolutely... but it serves no purpose knowing why/who started it unless you can wholly prevent it. Fortunately it won't happen again for quite some time given the levels of "burn off" and predicted "burn off" to come. Maybe we'll learn this time and concrete the lot :shifty:

[Katman]

Absolutely... but it serves no purpose knowing why/who started it unless you can wholly prevent it. Fortunately it won't happen again for quite some time given the levels of "burn off" and predicted "burn off" to come. Maybe we'll learn this time and concrete the lot :shifty:

So why isn't man-made deforestation being as loudly condemned as the issue of 'climate change' is being loudly pushed?

[mashman]

So why isn't man-made deforestation being as loudly condemned as the issue of 'climate change' is being loudly pushed?

Fucking good question! I often ask the same thing as trees are often glossed over in terms of reasons for the planet returning to equilibrium after a natural disaster. Volcanoes seem to get all of the press for the gases they release, yet ne'er a mention of the vegetation fires and the resultant co2 puff into the atmosphere that would have occurred at the same time. Maybe tree don;t have the significance that science says they do given that they teach that science at school?

[MaxPenguin]

So why isn't man-made deforestation being as loudly condemned as the issue of 'climate change' is being loudly pushed?

Climate change is a buzzword, that sadly will become boring soon. Deforestation is possibly mankind's stupidest thing.

[neels]

Would I like to see less Plastics - Yes, Go invent something Bio-degradeable that does all the things (or some of the things) that Plastic Does.
Would I like to see more Green Energy - Yes, Go figure out how to make tidal flow generators that consistently work and don't break in a Storm.
Would I like to see more Electric Vehicles - Yes, Constant torque all throughout the rev range - Go invent battery technology or a system that can recharge in the same time it takes to refuel.

Give me a better alternative and like the Capitalist I am, I'll use that. Give me some piss weak alternative that works like shit but you try to prop up with 'but muh environment' and I'll tell you to fuck off.

This approach is definately better than consuming the planet to extinction, but the alternative needs to be viable. The other issue that arises is when the alternative reduces profits so is not actively pursued by business, so unless it is demaded by the population it won't happen. Use of plastics is the best example of this, it's cheap and easy from the manufacturer end, and the other end of it's life isn't their problem.


Fair enough. I've always just considered the word deforestation to describe a man-made occurrence.
Deforestation could be consided to be both, there are large areas of the planet which were once covered in forest that are now desert, which occurred long before man got involved. There are equally large areas of the planet that have been deliberately deforested by humans, cutting down of the amazon rainforests for farming, or in NZ where the majority of forest removal has been by humans for various reasons.

It seems reasonably apparent that there is a natural climate change cycle, however it also seems that this is being accelerated by human activities.

I remember reading a while back that human use of resources exceeded the planets capacity to regenerate has been happening since the early 80's, and the major causes of that are population growth and overconsumption by developed countries.

Overconsumption is one area where individuals or populations can make a difference, simply by voting with their wallets. Supermarkets and fast food companies are already getting rid of the stupid plastic toys which have a very short life cycle before ending up in landfill, and working (albeit very slowly) on packaging options. Stupid things like giant hands or inflatable bats to bash together at sports games don't need to exist at all, so just stop making them, only a small difference but if you start adding up small differences they start to make a larger difference.

[mashman]

I remember reading a while back that human use of resources exceeded the planets capacity to regenerate has been happening since the early 80's, and the major causes of that are population growth and overconsumption by developed countries.

Overconsumption is one area where individuals or populations can make a difference, simply by voting with their wallets. Supermarkets and fast food companies are already getting rid of the stupid plastic toys which have a very short life cycle before ending up in landfill, and working (albeit very slowly) on packaging options. Stupid things like giant hands or inflatable bats to bash together at sports games don't need to exist at all, so just stop making them, only a small difference but if you start adding up small differences they start to make a larger difference.

Earth Overshoot? (https://www.footprintnetwork.org/2019/06/26/press-release-june-2019-earth-overshoot-day/)

The issue with voting with the wallet, is that it puts people out of work and the more people that go out of work, the more that prices will rise with less people being able to buy and less available to buy etc... The small steps will, unfortunately, only go so far. The CEO of coca-cola recently estimated that once competition for reusable resource has bedded down, the best they will reach is 50% recyclables in their products. It's fizzy water, and similar to toys, needs to stop production. Voting with the wallet is going to cause a few economic issues. And similarly to the small steps in terms of resource use/reuse, each business that falls by the wayside will collectively add up to some serious issues for the economy. Catch 22, but addressing overconsumption is gonna require more than voting with our wallets as a solution. Not saying that it won't get the ball rolling, but it'll likely be seen as acceptable business attrition... if only to keep confidence high.

[neels]

The issue with voting with the wallet, is that it puts people out of work and the more people that go out of work, the more that prices will rise with less people being able to buy and less available to buy etc... The small steps will, unfortunately, only go so far. The CEO of coca-cola recently estimated that once competition for reusable resource has bedded down, the best they will reach is 50% recyclables in their products. It's fizzy water, and similar to toys, needs to stop production. Voting with the wallet is going to cause a few economic issues. And similarly to the small steps in terms of resource use/reuse, each business that falls by the wayside will collectively add up to some serious issues for the economy. Catch 22, but addressing overconsumption is gonna require more than voting with our wallets as a solution. Not saying that it won't get the ball rolling, but it'll likely be seen as acceptable business attrition... if only to keep confidence high.

If there is demand for a product, consumer choice will only determine which business has market share, if a manufacturer doesn't evolve and dies another that provides what the consumer wants will replace it. That's business.

Economic effect is one of the favourite arguments against change, however if there is a forced change the economy manages to carry on, so I suspect the main reason for this is that it will affect the people making the argument and/or their interests.

The alternative is continue consuming until there's nothing left for anyone, in which case supply and demand will increase prices and lead to less people being able to buy anyway.

[mashman]

If there is demand for a product, consumer choice will only determine which business has market share, if a manufacturer doesn't evolve and dies another that provides what the consumer wants will replace it. That's business.

Economic effect is one of the favourite arguments against change, however if there is a forced change the economy manages to carry on, so I suspect the main reason for this is that it will affect the people making the argument and/or their interests.

The alternative is continue consuming until there's nothing left for anyone, in which case supply and demand will increase prices and lead to less people being able to buy anyway.

It isn't just consumer choice that determines market share. At the end of the cycle it does, but first the money has to be found to create the business, and that requires investors and banks. Where an idea is too good i.e. detrimental to the economy, so it won't be offered as a choice for consumers to choose from given the economic effects that would take place on its introduction. As you say though, that's business... who cares that that collective activity is essentially destroying the place.

As you say, the people making the arguments want to see their outcome, else if they understood their economic activity as rational human beings they would put themselves out of business... therefore they must embrace any narrative to the contrary that their activity is unsustainable. Sad, but hey, they are the positions one must adopt to stay in business. Banks and investors need something to put their money into so that there's enough money to create more jobs in the economy in general to prevent mad price fluctuations and ensure discretionary income is available to buy what is produced and a blah blah blah......... so the economic effects are more than real as such only changes the potential timetable for collapse.

[TheDemonLord]

Where an idea is too good i.e. detrimental to the economy, so it won't be offered as a choice for consumers to choose from given the economic effects that would take place on its introduction.

Yep.

Online Streaming services definitely don't exist.
Nor does online News Websites.
Email? Nope, we do everything by Fax.
Mobile phones? All you ever need is a landline.

/sarcasm

[FJRider]

My greatest fear is that it might come out that some of these fires were started by 'climate change' activists.

That could serve genuine environmentalists a crippling blow worldwide.

It's not the "crippling blow" I'd like to see them get ... ;)

[Jeeper]

I wonder how Blockbuster is doing.

[sidecar bob]

Deforestation is possibly mankind's stupidest thing.

Id still rather a woman that trims things a little though.:msn-wink:

[Katman]

It's not the "crippling blow" I'd like to see them get ... ;)

I suspect they'd say the same about you.

[FJRider]

I suspect they'd say the same about you.

They don't even know I exist. But you've probably already asked them to suck your cock.

Oops ... I forgot. You don't do THAT anymore ... <_<

[Katman]

Oops ... I forgot. You don't do THAT anymore ... <_<

But clearly your fixation remains.

[FJRider]

But clearly your fixation remains.

Is that the best you can do .. ??

You used to be witty. Old age ... ??

[JimO]

Hey, there's always World War 3 to look forward to.
any day now, sort out a few of the ok boomer pricks

[MaxPenguin]

It's not the "crippling blow" I'd like to see them get ... ;)

What? So you are happy for the rainforests to be cut down, mass extinction, poor air quality, rising sea levels etc etc? All they are trying to do is help, what is wrong with that? They are not all smelly hippies you know, most are just normal people wanting a better place to live.

Or is it that you are afraid your unsustainable lifestyle will be threatened before you die? Get a grip man, it's not all about you.

[husaberg]

This approach is definately better than consuming the planet to extinction, but the alternative needs to be viable. The other issue that arises is when the alternative reduces profits so is not actively pursued by business, so unless it is demaded by the population it won't happen. Use of plastics is the best example of this, it's cheap and easy from the manufacturer end, and the other end of it's life isn't their problem.


Deforestation could be consided to be both, there are large areas of the planet which were once covered in forest that are now desert, which occurred long before man got involved. There are equally large areas of the planet that have been deliberately deforested by humans, cutting down of the amazon rainforests for farming, or in NZ where the majority of forest removal has been by humans for various reasons.

It seems reasonably apparent that there is a natural climate change cycle, however it also seems that this is being accelerated by human activities.

I remember reading a while back that human use of resources exceeded the planets capacity to regenerate has been happening since the early 80's, and the major causes of that are population growth and overconsumption by developed countries.

Overconsumption is one area where individuals or populations can make a difference, simply by voting with their wallets. Supermarkets and fast food companies are already getting rid of the stupid plastic toys which have a very short life cycle before ending up in landfill, and working (albeit very slowly) on packaging options. Stupid things like giant hands or inflatable bats to bash together at sports games don't need to exist at all, so just stop making them, only a small difference but if you start adding up small differences they start to make a larger difference.

A lot of what people call a shortage is down to choice of crops/fodder or animals grown.
For instance i can grow 12,000kg/ha of Wheat or 1,200KG of Meat or 1000kg of milk solids or about 25,000kg/ha of potatoes
People want meat and dairy products and the money in producing these in scale are greater without saturating markets for specialty crops, So thats what the majority of nz grows.
Even if all of NZ farms were to grow crops there would still need to be fallow periods and rotations and there is environmental impacts from soil run off and pests and weeds.
Farners produce what the market and the climate dictates, Years ago there was breeding operations and finishing on the fertile lowlands now these are predominately dairy.
A lot of the land clearance in the Amazon i believe is due to illegal logging and the people not using fertiliser and correct drainage techniques. So they clear more land as the yeilds go down
Brazil along with USA i believe exports a lot of stock fodder to China. Feed crops such as Maize and rape Canola are also increasing diverted for biofuel . Its not to feed its people.

Over the years i have cleared approx 8ha of swamp that was the home to nothing much at all into highly productive farm land
I have cleared 25HA of second growth bush to the same.
And clear cleared multiple areas of invasive scrub to farm land.
I have also fenced of and planted streams and bush and riparian areas.
We left areas of significance, We also left the terrace edge areas so people could still enjoy the vistas and maintained wildlife breeding areas and corridors.
This year we will be making a covered euro style barn to protect soil and improve the animals welfare in wet periods.
If people are going to further limit the land use and rights on privately owned areas beyond the current rules such as the RMA then someone should be paying the landowner as the landowner will stil have to pay the rates on the land.
You can imagine the uproar if someone told an Auckland property owner owner they can't build on their section.

[FJRider]

What? So you are happy for the rainforests to be cut down, mass extinction, poor air quality, rising sea levels etc etc? All they are trying to do is help, what is wrong with that? They are not all smelly hippies you know, most are just normal people wanting a better place to live.

Or is it that you are afraid your unsustainable lifestyle will be threatened before you die? Get a grip man, it's not all about you.

I haven't cut down a rain-forest for ages.

Help is not their aim, it is to take illegal action in an attempt to reinforce their policy and beliefs ... in an attempt to prove their point.

If enough people pointed their finger at you calling you an idiot ... how many fingers need to be pointed before you believe them ... ??? :scratch::scratch::scratch:

[FJRider]

What? So you are happy for the rainforests to be cut down, mass extinction, poor air quality, rising sea levels etc etc? All they are trying to do is help, what is wrong with that? They are not all smelly hippies you know, most are just normal people wanting a better place to live.



I work on Stewart island. I have been working here for three years. I'm on and off boats on a daily basis. The wharf's and jetties are still the same distance above water at high tide. There's still no sign of any warming there either ... any explanation for this anomaly ???

[MaxPenguin]

I haven't cut down a rain-forest for ages.

Help is not their aim, it is to take illegal action in an attempt to reinforce their policy and beliefs ... in an attempt to prove their point.

If enough people pointed their finger at you calling you an idiot ... how many fingers need to be pointed before you believe them ... ??? :scratch::scratch::scratch:

Don't care if idiots call me an idiot.
Yes they are protesting, what's wrong with that? Why is Nestle cutting down rainforests legal, yet strapping yourself to an oil rig illegal?




I work on Stewart island. I have been working here for three years. I'm on and off boats on a daily basis. The wharf's and jetties are still the same distance above water at high tide. There's still no sign of any warming there either ... any explanation for this anomaly ???

Now you are being deliberately pathetic.

[Coldrider]

MaxPenguin

You have joined a motorcycle forum, you have 66 posts yet your official post count is zero. That is because you have nothing to contribute of value to motorcycling.
What was your point of joining, I think I missed that.)

[Katman]

MaxPenguin

You have joined a motorcycle forum, you have 66 posts yet your official post count is zero. That is because you have nothing to contribute of value to motorcycling.
What was your point of joining, I think I missed that.)

What was your point of joining the thread?

[Coldrider]

What was your point of joining the thread?

Because its rant and rave and nothing to do with the wider motorcycling community.
It benefits no one, comes to no good, is the cause of discontent in kiwibiker,.
It also proves that opinions are like arseholes.
Everyone gots one, everything thinks that theirs is the best and only, theirs doesnt stink, but in reality we all know that all arseholes of full of shit.OK.

[Coldrider]

Sorry, forgot to say Happy new year Katman.

[MaxPenguin]

MaxPenguin

You have joined a motorcycle forum, you have 66 posts yet your official post count is zero. That is because you have nothing to contribute of value to motorcycling.
What was your point of joining, I think I missed that.)

Can you stay on topic please, but seeing as how you are nosey, I haven't seen anything motorcycle related that has inspired me to contribute yet. If the forum bosses don't like non motorcycle chat then why have a rant or rave/ off topic section at all?

[FJRider]

Now you are being deliberately pathetic.

So you have no explanation ... why didn't you just say that ???

no need to be rude ... :motu:

[Coldrider]

Can you stay on topic please, but seeing as how you are nosey, I haven't seen anything motorcycle related that has inspired me to contribute yet. If the forum bosses don't like non motorcycle chat then why have a rant or rave/ off topic section at all?

Exactly correct, without rant and rave Kiwibiker is nothing.

[FJRider]

Can you stay on topic please, but seeing as how you are nosey, I haven't seen anything motorcycle related that has inspired me to contribute yet. If the forum bosses don't like non motorcycle chat then why have a rant or rave/ off topic section at all?

One reason that the post count of members is not counted is ... this is a motorcycle forum. The lack of inclusion of the "Off Topic" posts is because this is a motorcycle Forum. Post count also enhances your ability to increase the amount of "Rep" you can award/deduct for green/red "rep" should you like/hate another members post.

Read site rules for a more in depth explanation of awarding or deducting reputation points. (A favourite "game" some can play)

Try the "Game" yourself ... ;)

[Berries]

I work on Stewart island.
Not for Real Journeys?

[FJRider]

Not for Real Journeys?


Nope. For Sanford on the Salmon farm. 7 days on and 7 off.

Each Monday I'm going one way across the strait or the other ... WITH Real Journeys though.

[mashman]

If you had all of the resources you required at your finger tips and you could muster them within 72 hours to fight any fire, would you send what you could afford, or all of it? Because all of it is not a choice. This is solely due to budget constraint. (partly highlighted when some fella mentioned that there were more planes dotted about the place, but they needed to be paid for before the could be used out of state... but also partly because it is absolutely true, budget constraint limits response)

Put it this way, if you were the PM and you knew you had all of the resources you required dotted around the country and potentially from overseas to potentially put out the fire of the century, wouldn't you send everything that you could lay your hands on given the destruction and hardship that comes with it and after it? ONLY if you can afford it is the current state of play.

The fires will continue until they run out of fuel. That's the way nature does it. Our response is far from adequate given the resource available. Put it this way, would you not have "ordered" (logically volunteered etc...) tankers that go to and from water bottling plants to deliver to where the fire is? ONLY if you can afford it.

Our response to fire is budget constrained irrespective of who is PM.

[neels]

Put it this way, if you were the PM and you knew you had all of the resources you required dotted around the country and potentially from overseas to potentially put out the fire of the century, wouldn't you send everything that you could lay your hands on given the destruction and hardship that comes with it and after it? ONLY if you can afford it is the current state of play.

Our response to fire is budget constrained irrespective of who is PM.
The other consideration is that you don't necessarily send all of your resources to one place because that leaves you unprotected at all of the other places.

Nobody wants to pay the cost of having resources to cover 100% of possible scenarios, maybe design for 80-90% and hope the worst never happens. I'm sure the very same people who are complaining about the lack of response from firefighters would have been moaning like crazy if tax was increased to pay for firefighting equipment and people that sit idle for 99.9% of the time.


The fires will continue until they run out of fuel. That's the way nature does it.
Interesting that a number of the fires appear to have been started by humans, possibly encouraged by decisions made by humans on how bush is managed, but ultimately nature will decide when they are finished. A news report last night on one of the fires said that either the weather changes, or it keeps burning until it gets to the coast, the humans may be able to manage or mitigate small areas but there's no chance of putting the fire out completely.

[TheDemonLord]

On an aside - Metallica donated a bunch of cash to the Australian wild fire effort - with no mention of Politics, Climate Change other other Agenda in the press release other than 'Here's some money to help with a terrible situation'

Many people would do well to follow that example.

[mashman]

The other consideration is that you don't necessarily send all of your resources to one place because that leaves you unprotected at all of the other places.

Nobody wants to pay the cost of having resources to cover 100% of possible scenarios, maybe design for 80-90% and hope the worst never happens. I'm sure the very same people who are complaining about the lack of response from firefighters would have been moaning like crazy if tax was increased to pay for firefighting equipment and people that sit idle for 99.9% of the time.

Oh absolutely there are many arguments against doing such a thing, as you say it leaves other areas vulnerable. But there are levels of vulnerability given that some areas are in imminent danger, whilst others just sit and wait to see if the fire will make it that far instead of joining an effort it collectively try to smash it to stop it spreading.

For sure. I wasn't trying to say that the fire service should be increased to cater for the impossible to predict, moreover that all of the resources we can spare should be going into dealing with it when it does happen... hence water going to fight the fire instead of joggers thirst (as well as as many locals as possible). As you say, we have what we need for the most part in terms of firefighters and firefighting year in year out, but sometimes ya need to deploy more, and the associated cost limits the response. One way or another the taxpayer is going to pay... even if it is only higher insurance premiums to cover the new risk levels and lost revenue to payouts.



Interesting that a number of the fires appear to have been started by humans, possibly encouraged by decisions made by humans on how bush is managed, but ultimately nature will decide when they are finished. A news report last night on one of the fires said that either the weather changes, or it keeps burning until it gets to the coast, the humans may be able to manage or mitigate small areas but there's no chance of putting the fire out completely.


Farcanal... but to be expected I guess. Climate change or not, we really are setup to fail where we ?can't/refuse? to apply ourselves accordingly.

[neels]

One way or another the taxpayer is going to pay... even if it is only higher insurance premiums to cover the new risk levels and lost revenue to payouts.
True. One way or another an event of this magnitude is going to bite, either spending up front to minimise or prevent it, or to clean up the mess afterwards.

You only have to look at the recent earthquakes in nz to see this, in particular underinsurance of public assets leading to huge ongoing costs funded by ratepayers.

[mashman]

True. One way or another an event of this magnitude is going to bite, either spending up front to minimise or prevent it, or to clean up the mess afterwards.

You only have to look at the recent earthquakes in nz to see this, in particular underinsurance of public assets leading to huge ongoing costs funded by ratepayers.

Aye... the flipside being the required economic growth as more builders are required and imported etc... to spend the payout money replacing that which was burned. Wonder how close insurance and rebuilding costs are?

[MaxPenguin]

Aye... the flipside being the required economic growth as more builders are required and imported etc... to spend the payout money replacing that which was burned. Wonder how close insurance and rebuilding costs are?

I wonder how many of the people moaning about the Aussie government not fronting up due to lack of money, have participated in tax free cashies.

[onearmedbandit]

I wonder how many of the people moaning about the Aussie government not fronting up due to lack of money, have participated in tax free cashies.

Of course. Not many people enjoy paying their taxes, and of those many will be happy to do what they can to pay less be it cashies, tax havens, trust funds, incorrectly declaring income, income splitting etc. But they're quick to criticise when the government says the coffers are empty.

[TheDemonLord]

Of course. Not many people enjoy paying their taxes, and of those many will be happy to do what they can to pay less be it cashies, tax havens, trust funds, incorrectly declaring income, income splitting etc. But they're quick to criticise when the government says the coffers are empty.

There was an Economist I think (could be wrong on their occupation) who outlined an argument about Tax Loopholes and it was something like:

"It is everyone's Civic duty to pay the least amount of Tax legally" - they went on to outline points around it's a bulwark against lazy law making, government overreach etc. etc. Was an interesting Point of View.

[onearmedbandit]

There was an Economist I think (could be wrong on their occupation) who outlined an argument about Tax Loopholes and it was something like:

"It is everyone's Civic duty to pay the least amount of Tax legally" - they went on to outline points around it's a bulwark against lazy law making, government overreach etc. etc. Was an interesting Point of View.

Without a doubt, paying more than you are legally required is just dumb. Lying about how much you should have to pay is different and in certain situations illegal.

[Viking01]

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/submarine-fleet-tipped-to-cost-225b-to-build-and-maintain-20191129-p53fds.html

[jasonu]

On an aside - Metallica donated a bunch of cash to the Australian wild fire effort - with no mention of Politics, Climate Change other other Agenda in the press release other than 'Here's some money to help with a terrible situation'

Many people would do well to follow that example.

Yep $500,000
They specified the money go to rural efforts.
Good on them.

[mashman]

I wonder how many of the people moaning about the Aussie government not fronting up due to lack of money, have participated in tax free cashies.

Par for the course to stay ahead really innit. Our collective inability to react shouldn't be pinned on any one or any thing other than our collective inability to react. Like the earthquakes in Chch. Untrained personnel got stuck in for as long as they could get time off work, but once work called, they had to go back. Similarly with the fires. At some point people who are volunteering to save others are going to have to go back to work... or at least will be sidetracked trying to keep their shit together as they literally watch the world burn about them. Our collective inability to react accordingly is the issue that needs a finger pointed at it. It gets away with it almost every time because we can hang some one or blame some thing for how an event started. Some kids starting fires and tax "dodging" for principle or for gain doesn't really make a blind bit of difference (other than some extra funds to fight the fire maybe) v's what we didn't/couldn't do and why. Coz when we address the didn't/couldn't, then the next time there won't be the same issues. As such you could chuck NESARA/GESARA cash at the problem and it wouldn't prepare us for next time......... Meh

[mashman]

https://www.smh.com.au/politics/federal/submarine-fleet-tipped-to-cost-225b-to-build-and-maintain-20191129-p53fds.html

If contracts have been signed, then the coffers are empty and will remain so until they elect a government that will cancel the contracts... and do the other stuff to of course :killingme...

[TheDemonLord]

Yep $500,000
They specified the money go to rural efforts.
Good on them.

Just as well they donated Money.

I don't think taking advise from their songs would help:

Fight fire with fire
or
Blackened
or
Fuel

[FJRider]

Without a doubt, paying more than you are legally required is just dumb. Lying about how much you should have to pay is different and in certain situations illegal.

Tax evasion is considered to be quite serious in most countries (by the governments). Al Capone was jailed for it. It was the only crime they could pin on him.

[FJRider]

There was an Economist I think (could be wrong on their occupation) who outlined an argument about Tax Loopholes and it was something like:

"It is everyone's Civic duty to pay the least amount of Tax legally" - they went on to outline points around it's a bulwark against lazy law making, government overreach etc. etc. Was an interesting Point of View.

All the "Rich Pricks" are often accused of not paying much in the way of tax. But if they only pay what they are legally required to pay ... using whatever loophole's they are legally allowed to use ... what is the issue .. ??? :whistle:

The NZ tax laws are not that exciting ... but if there are ways of not paying as much as you are now ... perhaps we should look a bit harder at those rules ... :cool:

[Jeeper]

There is a big difference between tax evasion (illegal) and tax optimization (legal).

[FJRider]

There is a big difference between tax evasion (illegal) and tax optimization (legal).

But the not paying much tax if you're rich ... sort of pisses off those with not much money and still gets taxed (seemingly heavily) ... at normal rates.

The fact they never actually looked for tax reduction possibilities is seldom ever considered in any of their thought processes..

With the average Joe ... now not required to do their own tax return nowadays ... they seem (to them) hard done by.


But you still can file your own tax return.

[F5 Dave]

I remember sticker about Venus and Mars tonight. About 79. Not sure but I wasn't cool enough to find out where they came from so I never had one.

Sad.

[Katman]

Sad.

I'm sad for you.

[F5 Dave]

Thank you Katman that means a lot especially from you.

[ellipsis]

..I'm nonplussed...but I'm not exactly sure about what, yet...I must have to learn to worry a lot more about the inevitabilities of life on a living planet, run by silly, humans...the story about the little Dutch boy with his finger in the Dyke doesn't cut the mustard when it comes to tectonics, a completely changing sphere we live on, tidal movements dictated by weather situations that have changed constantly over millenia due to ice, heat , ice , heat, other extraterrestrial shit happening, sun fluctuations and more volcanic intrusions and then more shit and multitudes of extinctions before any thing with half a brain could scratch it's own arse and smile...

...all this, we can save the planet shit is really just drivel...we are here until Gaia, Mother Nature shifts the goal posts, again...any wank that has strong opinions on what humans can do to stop whats gonna happen next is, well...a bit silly

[MaxPenguin]

..I'm nonplussed...but I'm not exactly sure about what, yet...I must have to learn to worry a lot more about the inevitabilities of life on a living planet, run by silly, humans...the story about the little Dutch boy with his finger in the Dyke doesn't cut the mustard when it comes to tectonics, a completely changing sphere we live on, tidal movements dictated by weather situations that have changed constantly over millenia due to ice, heat , ice , heat, other extraterrestrial shit happening, sun fluctuations and more volcanic intrusions and then more shit and multitudes of extinctions before any thing with half a brain could scratch it's own arse and smile...

...all this, we can save the planet shit is really just drivel...we are here until Gaia, Mother Nature shifts the goal posts, again...any wank that has strong opinions on what humans can do to stop whats gonna happen next is, well...a bit silly

True, saving the planet is a dumb catchphrase.

[FJRider]

A few years ago, the hole in the Ozone layer was the big worry. The planet was doomed (apparently) if we didn't sort it out quick smart.

But now the hole is the smallest it's been. Due (apparently) to unprecedented warm weather patterns. But (apparently) there is no evidence it's due to Climate change. Go figure ...

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2019/2019-ozone-hole-is-the-smallest-on-record-since-its-discovery

[FJRider]

True, saving the planet is a dumb catchphrase.

Dumb ideas are only dumb if they don't work.

Saving the Planet gets people thinking (not always an easy task) and doing (well ... some are doing) stuff .... ;)

[Katman]

True, saving the planet is a dumb catchphrase.

I fear that the growing movement that has been addressing the 'health' of the planet we live on, is being hijacked and subverted by the whole 'climate change' story.

And as I said earlier, I also fear that the whole 'climate change' story is being driven by some for personal gain.

[MaxPenguin]

I fear that the growing movement that has been addressing the 'health' of the planet we live on, is being hijacked and subverted by the whole 'climate change' story.

And as I said earlier, I also fear that the whole 'climate change' story is being driven by some for personal gain.

Personal gain doesn't necessarily mean bad though.

[MaxPenguin]

Dumb ideas are only dumb if they don't work.

Saving the Planet gets people thinking (not always an easy task) and doing (well ... some are doing) stuff .... ;)

Fair enough


A few years ago, the hole in the Ozone layer was the big worry. The planet was doomed (apparently) if we didn't sort it out quick smart.

But now the hole is the smallest it's been. Due (apparently) to unprecedented warm weather patterns. But (apparently) there is no evidence it's due to Climate change. Go figure ...

https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2019/2019-ozone-hole-is-the-smallest-on-record-since-its-discovery

Wasn't it fixed by making changes to aerosol products etc. NASA found the hole and legislation was put through and it worked.

[Katman]

Personal gain doesn't necessarily mean bad though.

It usually does when it over-rides collective gain though.

[mashman]

Found this and thought of you... just in case you'd like to add something.....

"Why is this important?

AUSTRALIA IS NOT RUNNING OUT OF WATER...
IT IS BEING SOLD FOR PROFIT !

Let's stop arguing about whether climate change is real or a hoax, it really doesn't matter any more. Australia is in a catastrophic state of emergency and if these water mis-use practices are not immediately ceased, the situation will become even more disastrous." (https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/stop-the-sale-of-australia-s-water-supply-now)

[Katman]

Found this and thought of you... just in case you'd like to add something.....

"Why is this important?

AUSTRALIA IS NOT RUNNING OUT OF WATER...
IT IS BEING SOLD FOR PROFIT !

Let's stop arguing about whether climate change is real or a hoax, it really doesn't matter any more. Australia is in a catastrophic state of emergency and if these water mis-use practices are not immediately ceased, the situation will become even more disastrous." (https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/stop-the-sale-of-australia-s-water-supply-now)

I've thought for some time now that one day wars will be fought over water.

[mashman]

..I'm nonplussed...but I'm not exactly sure about what, yet...I must have to learn to worry a lot more about the inevitabilities of life on a living planet, run by silly, humans...the story about the little Dutch boy with his finger in the Dyke doesn't cut the mustard when it comes to tectonics, a completely changing sphere we live on, tidal movements dictated by weather situations that have changed constantly over millenia due to ice, heat , ice , heat, other extraterrestrial shit happening, sun fluctuations and more volcanic intrusions and then more shit and multitudes of extinctions before any thing with half a brain could scratch it's own arse and smile...

...all this, we can save the planet shit is really just drivel...we are here until Gaia, Mother Nature shifts the goal posts, again...any wank that has strong opinions on what humans can do to stop whats gonna happen next is, well...a bit silly

And yet despite all of those things, we have survived. The stories of collective human action aren't boys with fingers in dykes (cupcakes suddenly leaps to mind for some reason). It resulted in revolution... even if inherently useless as they blamed the people, removed them, and then scratched their collective heads for the next 3 to 4 hundred years as to what went wrong ha ha ha haaaaaaa... anyhoo...

Yup... no one gets out alive and despite everything that has been thrown at us so far, we're still here... but not for much longer if you comprehend the outcomes of 450+ active nuclear reactors no longer being maintained by humans. Tis the only real threat we pose to this place. As such the Save The Planet wank brigade actually have a point for a change, and a point on the not so silly side where nature is unlikely to wipe us out in a billion years or so... and somewhat ironically they're using the populist evidence against itself and they're getting shouted at for it.

But hey, old cunts and excited puppies.

[mashman]

I've thought for some time now that one day wars will be fought over water.

Well, pun intended, there have been a few already. When Money/The Market dictates the destination of water, we must expect these things happen. This is the way it has been, is, and will forever be until things change... and if we're lucky to make it that far blah blah blah......... fact.

[MaxPenguin]

Found this and thought of you... just in case you'd like to add something.....

"Why is this important?

AUSTRALIA IS NOT RUNNING OUT OF WATER...
IT IS BEING SOLD FOR PROFIT !

Let's stop arguing about whether climate change is real or a hoax, it really doesn't matter any more. Australia is in a catastrophic state of emergency and if these water mis-use practices are not immediately ceased, the situation will become even more disastrous." (https://www.communityrun.org/petitions/stop-the-sale-of-australia-s-water-supply-now)

We will be hearing a lot more about water footprint. Its a good thing.

[Katman]

Let's stop arguing about whether climate change is real or a hoax....

My only problem with that is, if the whole 'climate change' story is truly for the betterment of mankind and the planet, why would it be based on a hoax?

And conversely, if the whole 'climate change' story is based on a hoax then it is absolutely vital to expose that hoax so we can get back to concentrating on issues that truly are for the betterment of mankind and the planet.

[MaxPenguin]

My only problem with that is, if the whole 'climate change' story is truly for the betterment of mankind and the planet, why would it be based on a hoax?

And conversely, if the whole 'climate change' story is based on a hoax then it is absolutely vital to expose that hoax so we can get back to concentrating on issues that truly are for the betterment of mankind and the planet.

It is real, how can it not be after ripping down trees and spewing co2 into the atmosphere with less ability to scrub it out.
The environmental movement is healthy at the moment with massive awareness and growth. The next few generations will push the changes we need. If not we are fucked, and deserve to be.

[Jeeper]

As the sun burns it's fuel and cools, relatively, won't that result in less gravitational pull. Which over time means Earth will drift away from it, thus cooling our atmosphere naturally? Of course non of us would be alive by then, but things are in motion for this planet to die eventually.

Let's make it last long as we can by taking care of what we can. Less waste, more renewable energy and materials.

[pritch]

I've thought for some time now that one day wars will be fought over water.

That has been thought to be a possibility for years now.

Water is a finite resource. It may not have seemed that way but The Australian use of water for commercial purposes has caused major problems there.

So too in California, the demand for almond milk is using unrealistic amounts of water. The big commercial almond orchards, as well as being very thirsty, are causing problems for bees too. They contract beekeepers to pollinate the trees but they won't stop using insecticides. Irrigation for dairying is also causing problems in California.

We are not immune, dairying in Canterbury, and local councils selling water to Chinese corporations for peanuts. Mind boggling.

Anybody who doubts that the climate is changing should hop on their bike and ride down to the glaciers. (The West Coast Highway is a great ride.) At the Fox glacier you ride in past lots of little signs: "In 1850 the glacier was here," "In 1960 the glacier was here." Etc etc. The glacier is but a small fraction of its former size, even compared to where it was 1960. Depressing.

In case you need something else to worry about, there is a shortage of sand for building too.
Some of the places from which sand is extracted are suffering ecological damage, the Mekong Delta f'rinstance. The sand in the big deserts is no use for building. The constantly shifting sands of the Sahara has rounded off the grains. Round sand is not suitable for making cement.

[Jeeper]

Fights over water rights are not a future things. They have been fought since the ancient times. Most of the old cities were always located next to a river, both for transportation and Agri/human use.

[pritch]

Not Australia but Britain. A climate change oops by the Police.


https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2020/jan/10/xr-extinction-rebellion-listed-extremist-ideology-police-prevent-scheme-guidance

[Katman]

It is real, how can it not be after ripping down trees and spewing co2 into the atmosphere with less ability to scrub it out.

As has been pointed out though, the climate has always gone through changes.

Instead of focusing on the words 'climate change' and all the airy-fairiness that goes with it, we'd be better off focusing on the root cause - which surely has to be deforestation.

[Jeeper]

It is real, how can it not be after ripping down trees and spewing co2 into the atmosphere with less ability to scrub it out.

You know what the sad reality is that the Earth actually has more trees now than say 30/35 years ago. In terms of absolute number of trees. But they are plantation forests, which do not support the biodiversity as the old growth forest does. Pine forests in NZ might scrub the CO2, but it's not supporting anything else on the floor of the forest.

Statistics and 'facts' can be easily manipulated whichever way you want.

[mashman]

My only problem with that is, if the whole 'climate change' story is truly for the betterment of mankind and the planet, why would it be based on a hoax?

And conversely, if the whole 'climate change' story is based on a hoax then it is absolutely vital to expose that hoax so we can get back to concentrating on issues that truly are for the betterment of mankind and the planet.

Other than being just anther control mechanism... Because what they were asking for in the 60's, in terms of pollution and the environment, didn't make a dent in the direction that followed. What else can you do when you know that mass scale unsustainability is looming in the future (the message of the 60's and we are the proof today) and the narrative is rigged, other than go with the narrative and push it to extremes that see it threaten mankind in the hope that it'll wake us up enough to react accordingly. Well, at least that's A potential reason why "good" scientists might embrace "bad" science... especially if you get to knock it down later and sew doubt etc... but such are tactics used by all parties.

Aye, concentrating on preparing for either type of climate change is eminently more important, because we know it can get hotter and colder and that the weather changes can be sever with natural local and extra-terrestrial events on scales that can fuck us up pretty quick smart like. If we prepared in such a way, we wouldn't need to rely on the science/politics/business for setting any given direction, as the direction would be pretty self-explanatory... but hey, that's next year :killingme

[mashman]

You know what the sad reality is that the Earth actually has more trees now than say 30/35 years ago. In terms of absolute number of trees. But they are plantation forests, which do not support the biodiversity as the old growth forest does. Pine forests in NZ might scrub the CO2, but it's not supporting anything else on the floor of the forest.

Statistics and 'facts' can be easily manipulated whichever way you want.

And many of the trees felled 30/35 years ago were much older than 30/35.

[FJRider]

... Wasn't it fixed by making changes to aerosol products etc. NASA found the hole and legislation was put through and it worked.

Where was this legislation put through ... ie: what countries ??? Or was it for the entire planet ??

Was the hole in the Ozone layer above Antarctica ... the only one they found ???

[FJRider]

... But they are plantation forests, which do not support the biodiversity as the old growth forest does. Pine forests in NZ might scrub the CO2, but it's not supporting anything else on the floor of the forest.

In my youth I worked for the Forest service in the central north island (out of Turangi). One block of Pine forest that was planted next to a native bush reserve ... was found to have native birds (including Kiwi) that spread themselves out into the exotic pine forest. The area planted was an area native trees were milled in the early days. Not much was left .. and what was left was burnt. The native undergrowth came away again ... but it was by no means only native bush undergrowth.


Statistics and 'facts' can be easily manipulated whichever way you want.


Who needs facts ... you just have to make it sound right. That's how some scams become so successful ...

[MaxPenguin]

Where was this legislation put through ... ie: what countries ??? Or was it for the entire planet ??

Was the hole in the Ozone layer above Antarctica ... the only one they found ???

Montreal protocol 1987. Hole was/is over Antarctica and this year is the smallest it's been.

[Viking01]

Where was this legislation put through ... ie: what countries ??? Or was it for the entire planet ??

Was the hole in the Ozone layer above Antarctica ... the only one they found ???

Maybe have a browse through the following link for some of the historical background on the ozone issue. The easiest way is to do a search for the keyword 'ozone' within the article (CTL-F), and then read forward from the first instance found.

https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2018/08/01/magazine/climate-change-losing-earth.html?smid=tw-nytmag&smtyp=cur

From memory, the surprising aspect was that there actually was some final agreement on legislation, and taking of global action (cease production and usage of CFC's).

[PrincessBandit]

While you guys are busy kicking each other in the balls I'm sewing wildlife pouches to send over to Australia for the animal rescue organisations that need them. Time to reactivate the Scary Bikers Sewing group??

[MaxPenguin]

While you guys are busy kicking each other in the balls I'm sewing wildlife pouches to send over to Australia for the animal rescue organisations that need them. Time to reactivate the Scary Bikers Sewing group??

Good stuff. Actually I thought that the discussion was pretty robust(husaberg being the exception) and pretty educational.

[Viking01]

I've thought for some time now that one day wars will be fought over water.

Think that you can safely say that that day is already upon us. Attach a few links that might be of interest .

1. Global Water Availability or Scarcity

https://www.wri.org/applications/maps/aqueduct-atlas/

2. Possibility of Conflict over Water

Slowly becoming a reality in parts of the world.

https://www.rt.com/news/water-shortage-un-population-901/
https://www.project-syndicate.org/commentary/water-scarcity-conflict-africa-india-by-jayati-ghosh-2019-11

3. Possible Conflict Areas

You only have to look at various areas on the global map to see potential (or active) conflict areas:

- Rivers from Himalayas down through Asia
- India and Pakistan
- From Lebanon down through the Golan to Jordan
- From Turkey down through Iraq
- From Ethiopia through Sudan to Egypt
- Across the African Sahel

4. Possible Global Economic Impact

A 2016 report on global water scarcity:

https://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/water/publication/high-and-dry-climate-change-water-and-the-economy

5. Global Corporate Knowledge and Activity
Certain major global corporates are well ahead of the rest of the pack in terms of securing and "locking up" ongoing access to water resources:

https://www.cdp.net/en/research/global-reports/global-water-report-2017
https://www.globalresearch.ca/the-new-water-barons-wall-street-mega-banks-are-buying-up-the-worlds-water/5383274
https://www.globalresearch.ca/swiss-development-aid-nestle-water-privatization/5687211

6. New Zealand

And here in NZ, as you will know, we are not spared from water related issues. Whether they be issues of (i) water availability and allocation for local consumption (ii) water quality (iii) water pricing and export (iv) cost of building infrastructure for water reticulation.

https://www.mfe.govt.nz/sites/default/files/media/Environmental%20reporting/our-fresh-water-at-a-glance_0.pdf
https://www.mfe.govt.nz/fresh-water/state-of-our-fresh-water/environmental-reporting

Finish with an article from an area with which I am familiar:

https://www.stuff.co.nz/environment/108619029/hawkes-bays-water-triple-whammy-of-dry-summer-new-river-restrictions-and-plans-to-increase-irrigation

[FJRider]

Montreal protocol 1987. Hole was/is over Antarctica and this year is the smallest it's been.

Even less enforceable than the Geneva convention.

And how many countries signed it that were from Aisa ??

[FJRider]

Montreal protocol 1987. Hole was/is over Antarctica and this year is the smallest it's been.

Do you really believe THAT fixed "The Hole" ... ?? ;)

[MaxPenguin]

Do you really believe THAT fixed "The Hole" ... ?? ;)

It's likely that it did, but I assume you know something else about it that I don't so do tell.

[FJRider]

It's likely that it did, but I assume you know something else about it that I don't so do tell.

"Since 2013, annual emissions of a banned chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) have increased by around 7,000 tonnes from eastern China, according to new research published in Nature today [Wednesday 22 May 2019] by an international team of scientists from the UK, South Korea, Japan, USA, Australia and Switzerland."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190522141808.htm

Perhaps ... unlikely.

[Jeeper]

Do you really believe THAT fixed "The Hole" ... ?? ;)In absence of a control subject, it would be impossible to establish or disestablish any causal relationships.

[ellipsis]

...this is definitely a robust conversation...very odd...

[FJRider]

In absence of a control subject, it would be impossible to establish or disestablish any causal relationships.

True.

But what was found was a hole in the Ozone layer. CFC's were blamed (by experts) as being the cause. But thousands of ton's of CFC's are still being released into the atmosphere. And the hole is getting smaller.

A bit of an anomaly would you say .. ??

[Jeeper]

A bit of an anomaly would you say .. ??

Definitely an anomaly based on imperfect understanding of the cause and effect by the scientists (rather subject matter experts) when the link was originally hypothesised. Our environment does not have one to one relationship, like increased CO2 will automatically raise temperatures around the world or CFCs directly destroy ozone.

[ellipsis]

...which leads back to the eventualities of future events, either immediately or down the line...there is no certainty, hypotheses of portents of what will be, eventuating...it's time to reflect on how fleeting was modern human's, thoughts of absolute realm over something they knew nothing of, for such a short time...grains of sand in a desert of time...

[Berries]

Bloody hippies.

[MaxPenguin]

"Since 2013, annual emissions of a banned chlorofluorocarbon (CFC) have increased by around 7,000 tonnes from eastern China, according to new research published in Nature today [Wednesday 22 May 2019] by an international team of scientists from the UK, South Korea, Japan, USA, Australia and Switzerland."

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2019/05/190522141808.htm

Perhaps ... unlikely.

Good googling, The good news is the hole is smaller. Dont hang on to that as some sort of argument against the people trying to stop deforestation and the like. It is a good thing they are Doing and needs encouragement.

[FJRider]

Good googling, The good news is the hole is smaller. Dont hang on to that as some sort of argument against the people trying to stop deforestation and the like. It is a good thing they are Doing and needs encouragement.

I'd much rather encourage those putting out the fires. A more immediate priority.

[husaberg]

While you guys are busy kicking each other in the balls I'm sewing wildlife pouches to send over to Australia for the animal rescue organisations that need them. Time to reactivate the Scary Bikers Sewing group??

Okay princess you got me, what is a wildlife pouch?

[mashman]

...which leads back to the eventualities of future events, either immediately or down the line...there is no certainty, hypotheses of portents of what will be, eventuating...it's time to reflect on how fleeting was modern human's, thoughts of absolute realm over something they knew nothing of, for such a short time...grains of sand in a desert of time...

"The true meaning of life is to plant trees, under whose shade you do not expect to sit." - someone. Too many people do it through business ;)

[ellipsis]

...bloody hippys...

[mashman]

...bloody hippys...

...flaming happys...

[MaxPenguin]

Not the easiest to post links on here, but hopefully this works. Very good article.

I give up find it yourselves

[Mike.Gayner]

So many baby boomers with hot takes in this thread.

[MaxPenguin]

http://https://blog.ucsusa.org/melanie-fitzpatrick/bushfire-ravaged-australia-is-crying-for-climate-action?_ga=2.247047300.1027551655.1578785536-1270312939.1578785536

[Viking01]

http://https://blog.ucsusa.org/melanie-fitzpatrick/bushfire-ravaged-australia-is-crying-for-climate-action?_ga=2.247047300.1027551655.1578785536-1270312939.1578785536

You might want to trim the leading http:// off the URL, and then the link works. Cheers.

[mashman]

https://blog.ucsusa.org/melanie-fitzpatrick/bushfire-ravaged-australia-is-crying-for-climate-action

Yet they cannot do what they must... which is a directive of the evidence and not open to opinion. Emissions come from production. To stop emissions, you stop production. Simply put, until they find an economic model that can handle mass unemployment (absolutely essential given the future also contains tech unemployment, resource fights, capital flight to the east, AI, resource scarcity, etc... all of which will requires such a model) so the economy will have to grow in order to pay back the money that was borrowed to fight the fires, build resilience etc... rinse and repeat. What a waste eh.

[GazzaH]

Yet they cannot do what they must... which is a directive of the evidence and not open to opinion.

Sorry Mashman, that is incomprehensible.


Emissions come from production.

No, 'emissions' come from both production and consumption. Consumption drives production.


To stop emissions, you stop production.

Stop the world: Mashman wants to alight!


Simply put, until they find an economic model that can handle mass unemployment (absolutely essential given the future also contains tech unemployment, resource fights, capital flight to the east, AI, resource scarcity, etc... all of which will requires such a model) so the economy will have to grow in order to pay back the money that was borrowed to fight the fires, build resilience etc... rinse and repeat.

"They" are "us" Mashman. The issue is global, not Aus, not Aus/NZ, not South Pacific, not The Southern Hemisphere, not The West, not The Developed Word ... but global. There are local issues, true, but they are mere trivia compared to the global problems.


What a waste eh.

Yep, waste is part of it. Our disposable societies aren't helping matters. Trivialising the global problems isn't helping either.

[mashman]

Sorry Mashman, that is incomprehensible.

The evidence says stop production, and has for at least 50 years. We haven't and aren't. Perhaps you don't understand the problem.


No, 'emissions' come from both production and consumption. Consumption drives production.

You can't consume what isn't produced. Ya see, ya really ain't instilling any confidence in me that you know what you're talking about... but lame trolls like.


Stop the world: Mashman wants to alight!

No, the evidence says that's what needs to be done. I think we're at the, I get to call you a dickhead in pretty good confidence that you're only going downhill from here.



"They" are "us" Mashman. The issue is global, not Aus, not Aus/NZ, not South Pacific, not The Southern Hemisphere, not The West, not The Developed Word ... but global. There are local issues, true, but they are mere trivia compared to the global problems.

Hence the stopping of production fucktard. Oh the escalation of it all.



Yep, waste is part of it. Our disposable societies aren't helping matters. Trivialising the global problems isn't helping either.

You just trivialised them you fucking moron.

The evidence says stop production, and has for at least 50 years. We haven't and aren't. Perhaps you don't understand the problem.

[GazzaH]

"The evidence says" that you aren't interested in a civil debate about the issues, Mashman.

Fine. I'll get my coat.

[mashman]

"The evidence says" that you aren't interested in a civil debate about the issues, Mashman.

Fine. I'll get my coat.

The evidence says that you've ignored every point that I've made and focused on the quite obviously (i thought) trolled part of the delivery. If you were interested in civil debate, you would have said "What evidence?" and ignored the shite.

You didn't... therefore I can only come to the conclusion that your post was a troll in a long line of troll posts. Which is fine, but at least put some effort into it coz the KB playbook is getting a little old and needs new material.

[mashman]

"The evidence says" that you aren't interested in a civil debate about the issues, Mashman.

Fine. I'll get my coat.

I Am. You are foucsed on the purposefully placed language.

[MaxPenguin]

This nèds support

https://i.stuff.co.nz/national/118704148/why-we-need-a-law-against-ecocide

[Swoop]

And how many countries signed it that were from Aisa?

None.
There's no such place.

[husaberg]

http://www.theozonehole.com/volcanicozonehole.htm

https://presentations.copernicus.org/QOS2016-116_presentation.pdf

[Voltaire]

When your out in the outback and running power cables is not practical.

https://thedriven.io/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/IMG-0738.jpg

From memory isn't AU power over 75% coal powered?

I had this discussion with a Manager about the pointlessness of turning the lights off for Earth Hour in NZ as someone had to drive to site to do it.

[Katman]

https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/Costco-toilet-paper-boreal-forest-sustainability-14079814.php

All in the name of pampered arses.

[MaxPenguin]

https://www.sfgate.com/local/article/Costco-toilet-paper-boreal-forest-sustainability-14079814.php

All in the name of pampered arses.

That's where we need the ecocide laws to come about. It blows my mind that this sort of thing is allowed. Who knew that bogroll was from rainforests? Bet it doesn't say it on the packet. Its deliberately misleading.

[OddDuck]

Probably time to chime in... the fires and seeing a red moon finally got me moving on something I've been toying with for over a year.

Went and bought an e-bike, for the purpose of day to day commute to work and local groceries. The idea is to reduce my personal footprint and maybe get a few others thinking or even taking the plunge themselves. Obviously an e-car or better yet e-motorcycle would be best but almighty dollars and all that, I had the cash to put down on an assisted pushie so that's it for now.

It's still early days but it's promising. The commute is about two minutes longer than the car and there's no need to get changed or have a shower - it's ride in work clothes and shoes and bingo, I'm there for my day.

Pros:

I'm getting some exercise even though it's assisted
Fresh air and sunlight
Stress reduction
Savings on petrol and tyre money
... and emissions of course

Cons:

It's a deadly treadly and yes the risks have gone up. This thing makes a motorcycle look safe
Exercise and getting sore / tired / eating more
Sunburn! Hasn't happened yet but if I run around at noon it will
Modify the bike money, there's a lot I want to do
Niggles when parking doing the groceries

For local stuff I've used the car for years, one day of rain aside I haven't needed to drive since I got the bike. I can if I want to. I just haven't needed to. I'll be riding again tomorrow. It was very nice to get back onto the Ducati today though...

[OddDuck]

Well, it looks like I've killed this thread. Apologies for that all, as you were. Let the debates continue please.

As an update for anyone else considering taking the ebike plunge, here's some direct experiences over the last two weeks.

People like the bike. I've had a lot of positive response over the last two weeks. I've also been letting a lot of people have a go on it and they come back very impressed.

Hills and headwinds are simply not a problem any more. Jolts off the road are. Bumps that wouldn't be an issue at normal cycle pace suddenly are a big problem at the new speeds, especially if riding day after day. I've ended up purchasing a Brook's sprung saddle. Looks seriously vintage but it works.

I'm having to dial back on speed, too. It's actually too easy to go fast. There is no longer any need to work hard to get from A to B. It's possible to tootle my way around and still get there in reasonable time, with the added benefit of arriving presentable. The other reason to take it easy is traffic. People are used to a certain speed range associated with pushies and drive or ride to that perception. Going like the clappers is just going to end badly, after a while.

In terms of real world utility, as a car replacement - there are limitations. There's only so far a person can ride before a change of clothes does become necessary after all. That depends on assist level, fitness, how you've dressed for the day, weather, etc etc... but it works just fine inside my neighborhood. The other car-replacement limitation is cargo. Backpacking groceries is very limiting and after not too long a carrier and panniers starts making a lot of sense.

Recharge: plug it in before dinner and it's back to 100% before bed. Currently I'm only having to charge it every three days riding or so.

Range: it's got more than enough for what I do with it, but that really is local. Everywhere I normally go with it is within 10 k's. Most people have around a 25km commute or similar and that'd mean a recharge every ride.

Security: lock it to a lamp post or similar while running errands and so far I've been fine. That said I wouldn't leave it outside overnight, even at home.

Weather: if it's wet then I take the car. It isn't wet most of the time, so most of the time I can take the e-bike.

Mood: suddenly I'm finding that I'm a lot more chilled out. That bit is working, big time. I'm just not in a tearing hurry any more, which carries over to the car and the motorcycle.

Where this is relevant to a motorcycle forum: there was a very strange feeling after getting back on the motorbike. Like a new set of reflexes were settling in. The motorcycle felt incredibly loose and... squashy, if that's the right word? I ended up checking my rear tyre for a slow leak three times before I realised that it was some sort of cross over from the e-bike. Riding the motorcycle was weird for another half hour and then I was fine again. It's been alright since, too, even with changes between the two. Hopefully this was just a one off thing.

However... the 25 kg (ish) weight of the bike is a problem. I currently have to haul the bike up and down a flight of stairs. Carrying it like I'd carry a normal pushie has given me a bit of a back strain - not at first, I think it's a bit of a cumulative thing. Possibly it'd be alright lifted to shoulder and carried that way, but holding it at hip level isn't working. My back does not like the off-center load. Currently I'm working on a ramp for the stairs, hopefully this will work with the bike's Walk mode so there's no lifting.

[ust2b]

Currently I'm working on a ramp for the stairs, hopefully this will work with the bike's Walk mode so there's no lifting.

Stupid question. Can you not set the pace at stupidly slow and simply walk/bump it up your stairs? Or drop a very long lead out your window, and chain your ride to a fence?

[OddDuck]

Perfectly fair question. Er, no. Aggressive stairs with biggish steps. The bike does have a walk function. I think these are great... there's a walk button, press and hold and it'll give you about 5% of motor output. Brilliant. Unfortunately it's not enough to get it climbing these stairs, they aren't grippy concrete, they're worn wood and there just isn't enough grip on the back tyre. Also it'll bang the hell out of the bike if I do this every day.

Leaving the bike out in the weather... yeah not keen on this. I live in a coastal area and have seen someone's pushie go from near new to tip shop trash in about six months, simply by being left out in the sea breeze.