Carbon Neutral Cities

[gryffron]

Much in the news today about Glasgow becoming a "carbon neutral" city. So how exactly can a city be carbon neutral? What does it mean? Does it just mean C02 produced within the city boundary, and ignore where the electricity comes from? Does it include people breathing?

The news today was talking about Electric cars and domestic heat exchangers. But neither of these has a much impact on the total demand for power. Just the form.

Can a city be carbon neutral by building a nuclear power station in the middle of it?

I can see they could have 100% insulation to remove heating demand, but that would be a huge project requiring the replacement of every building in the city. And doesn't seem to be even suggested by the planners. You could collect solar, which might be just about enough to provide TV, phones and light. But what about transport?

Gryff

[kiloran]

Much in the news today about Glasgow becoming a "carbon neutral" city. So how exactly can a city be carbon neutral? What does it mean? Does it just mean C02 produced within the city boundary, and ignore where the electricity comes from? Does it include people breathing?

The news today was talking about Electric cars and domestic heat exchangers. But neither of these has a much impact on the total demand for power. Just the form.

Can a city be carbon neutral by building a nuclear power station in the middle of it?

I can see they could have 100% insulation to remove heating demand, but that would be a huge project requiring the replacement of every building in the city. And doesn't seem to be even suggested by the planners. You could collect solar, which might be just about enough to provide TV, phones and light. But what about transport?

Gryff

It just means we walk to the local boozer instead of drive there

More seriously, I haven't got a scoobie what it means either. http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/councillorsan ... 0GZ30GNTDX should explain some of it but I've no idea what it means. Para 4.3, for example, states that we'll become RUGGEDISED! What the hell is that?

Oh, and the traditional plastic traffic cone on our Duke of Wellington statue will be banned (or become a carbon capture device): https://www.shutterstock.com/search/gla ... type=photo

--kiloran

[Breelander]

Para 4.3, for example, states that we'll become RUGGEDISED! What the hell is that?

This...

RUGGEDISED is a smart city project funded under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. It brings together three lighthouse cities: Rotterdam, Glasgow and Umeå and three fellow cities: Brno, Gdansk and Parma to test, implement and accelerate the smart city model across Europe.

https://ruggedised.eu/home/

[Maroochydore]

More seriously, I haven't got a scoobie what it means either. http://www.glasgow.gov.uk/councillorsan ... 0GZ30GNTDX should explain some of it but I've no idea what it means. Para 4.3, for example, states that we'll become RUGGEDISED! What the hell is that?--kiloran

More EU clap-trap:
RUGGEDISED is a smart city project funded under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. It brings together three lighthouse cities: Rotterdam, Glasgow and Umeå and three fellow cities: Brno, Gdansk and Parma to test, implement and accelerate the smart city model across Europe.

Working in partnership with businesses and research centres these six cities will demonstrate how to combine ICT, e-mobility and energy solutions to design smart, resilient cities for all. This means improving the quality of life of citizens, reducing the environmental impact of activities and creating a stimulating environment for sustainable economic development.

However good on Glasgow, population 608,000, area 175km2, for offsetting the carbon emissions of China (population 1,427,647,786), India (population 1,352,642,280) and the deforestation of the Amazon Rainforest area 5,500,000 km2.

Please excuse my sarcasm.

[kiloran]

Para 4.3, for example, states that we'll become RUGGEDISED! What the hell is that?

This...

RUGGEDISED is a smart city project funded under the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme. It brings together three lighthouse cities: Rotterdam, Glasgow and Umeå and three fellow cities: Brno, Gdansk and Parma to test, implement and accelerate the smart city model across Europe.

https://ruggedised.eu/home/

What?? So now we're a lighthouse city? I'm none the wiser, sadly. Though it does state that we will have a smart street. Singular!!

I'm sure it's all totally laudable, but why is it all in geek-marketing-speak rather than plain english?

--kiloran

[JohnB]

It probably means about as much as declaring it a nuclear free zone. I've no idea how you can lasso a city and declare it carbon neutral, given the fluxes of people, power and goods in and out. I bet they don't calculate the CO2 absorbed as the concrete in new buildings cures, for example.

[sg31]

Ruggedised suggests to me hardy scots folk wearing animal furs, hunting through the wasteland trying to survive the harsh Scottish winter. No wonder Glasgow was picked as a lighthouse city they are almost there already.

[anon155742]

CO2 is the primary metabolic output from respiration.

Perhaps they are planning on just winding down the city?

The exercise is a drop in the ocean. The population of Europe peaked in the 1990s, and has fallen slightly since then. In that same time, the population of Africa has more than doubled. At the same time, the African standard of living has increased with a concurrent rise in living standard. The same thing has happened across the world. The European carbon output has fallen and is now below the industrial revolutions levels again. China used more concrete in 5 years than America did in the 20th century and concrete has a very high climate impact.

When you mention anything population related to environmentalists they act like you have just stood on a kitten.

[BobbyD]

China used more concrete in 5 years than America did in the 20th century and concrete has a very high climate impact.

When you mention anything population related to environmentalists they act like you have just stood on a kitten.

The US had a population of about 75 million at the beginning of that period. The stat normally given is that between 2011 and 2013 China used more concrete than the US did in the 20th century. The Chinese population in 2011 was 1.3 billion...

[UncleEbenezer]

When you mention anything population related to environmentalists they act like you have just stood on a kitten.

What do you call the class of argument that goes "I heard an environmentalist say something dumb, therefore all environmentalists believe something dumb, therefore we can dismiss the environment"?

To be fair, I too tend to dismiss many of the organised groups. I couldn't join Friends of the Earth back in the '80s, 'cos when I went to a meeting the anti-nuclear nonsense dominated the real issue fossil fuels. And on population, I felt like a lone voice saying Geldof was doing more harm than good by fuelling a population bubble: famine relief without measures to curb population growth only makes things worse next time. Today's green party are sadly too loony-left, though even more sadly they no longer look much more dumb than the actual government ...

[DrFfybes]

The European carbon output has fallen and is now below the industrial revolutions levels again.

I was interested to see this in your excellent summary of the situation, and wondered if you have the source?

FWIW my take is similar in that the planet has 3x the population now as it did when I was born. Reducing my beef intake isn't going to make much difference in global terms.

When the neighbours were commenting how un-green our cars were I mentioned that the minibus that tours the village to take their child to school uses a lot more fuel than we do. "But you choose to drive a car like that". "I presume you chose to have three children.".

Paul

[kiloran]

The European carbon output has fallen and is now below the industrial revolutions levels again.

I'm absolutely no expert in this, but I wonder if the fact that so much of our manufacturing has been outsourced to Asia and elsewhere has affected this.

--kiloran

[Lootman]

I too tend to dismiss many of the organised groups. I couldn't join Friends of the Earth back in the '80s, 'cos when I went to a meeting the anti-nuclear nonsense dominated the real issue fossil fuels. And on population, I felt like a lone voice saying Geldof was doing more harm than good by fuelling a population bubble: famine relief without measures to curb population growth only makes things worse next time. Today's green party are sadly too loony-left, though even more sadly they no longer look much more dumb than the actual government ...

Isn't every one of these groups morally suspect?

Vegans are not content to love veggies. They have to hate meat and those who like to eat it.

Cyclists are not content to love bikes. They have to hate cars and those who drive.

The climate mob are not content to travel by wind and solar power. They have to shame those who like to fly.

Minorities are not content to fight for non-whites, gays or women. They have to hate straight white men.

Lefties are not content to support the poor. They have to hate the successful.

And so on. Liberals have become the most intolerant people on earth.

[UncleEbenezer]

Isn't every one of these groups morally suspect?

Something about organised pressure groups collecting activist minorities with strong views, whose activity puts up barriers to a silent majority of would-be supporters?

Perhaps the most remarkable case in recent times has been the weaponisation of antisemitism, not just in the general case (as in BBC hatred of straight white men) but against a politician foolish enough to criticise the behaviour of Israel. While decent honest Jewish people[1] steer clear of the organised groups that purport to represent them.

And so on. Liberals have become the most intolerant people on earth.

As noted quite forcefully by Tom Sharpe in the 1970s. And doubtless by others at various times in history that don't spring to mind just now.

Not that it's quite true: there's plenty of intolerance elsewhere too. Where "liberals" stand out is in the combination of intolerance with quasi-religious zeal, media/chattering class presence, and Establishment support, all over several decades.

Of course the backlash against that is also strongly in evidence, Trump being an obvious manifestation. I wonder if the Democrats as a party are capable of learning the lesson and will put up an electable candidate against him this year?

[elkay]

Cyclists are not content to love bikes. They have to hate cars and those who drive.

This one is out of place. I'm a cyclist who drives a car. And I don't know any cyclists that don't drive as well.

[UncleEbenezer]

Cyclists are not content to love bikes. They have to hate cars and those who drive.

This one is out of place. I'm a cyclist who drives a car. And I don't know any cyclists that don't drive as well.

Methinks he's caught you. That one isn't at all out of place, because they're all caricatures, with probably a handful of real people who legitimately fit the description. That one neither more nor less than the others.

[servodude]

Liberals have become the most intolerant people on earth.

Don't put yourself down, you're doing a grand job

[Lootman]

Liberals have become the most intolerant people on earth.

Don't put yourself down, you're doing a grand job

You know, I don't usually think of myself as a liberal (and certainly not a LibDem). Nor do I have much use for such labels.

But that said I do try not to impose my views on others so perhaps that does make me a true liberal. My beef with some of the groups cited is that they do very much try and impose their views on others, shaming them for eating meat or flying or driving a car or being successful or merely being a white male. It's when the line is crossed from holding a belief to being so consumed with it that you think it is OK to take "direct action" or engage in "civil disobedience" or become some kind of "activist" that I think illiberality and intolerance happens.

It has to be possible to support a cause without hating on those who do not. If that makes me a liberal then I guess there are worse stereotypes you could confer upon me.

Anyway I am nowhere close to being carbon-neutral and don't see that changing. And the last time I went on a protest was 1974.

[servodude]

Liberals have become the most intolerant people on earth.

Don't put yourself down, you're doing a grand job

You know, I don't usually think of myself as a liberal (and certainly not a LibDem). Nor do I have much use for such labels.

If you don't "have much use for such labels" why use them as you do?

To paraphrase yourself:
If you put your name to a post with a litany of ridiculous stereotypes and straw men to deride sectors of society then it increases the risk that you will be deemed a intolerant crackpot. It is really, really easy to avoid such misidentification.

- sd

[servodude]

Don't put yourself down, you're doing a grand job

You know, I don't usually think of myself as a liberal (and certainly not a LibDem). Nor do I have much use for such labels.

If you don't "have much use for such labels" why use them as you do?

To paraphrase yourself:
If you put your name to a post with a litany of ridiculous stereotypes and straw men to deride sectors of society then it increases the risk that you will be deemed a intolerant crackpot. It is really, really easy to avoid such misidentification.

- sd

Anyway this is DAK not the other place and the answer to the question is: audit, reduce and offset

in brief:
- track and/or estimate emissions
- try and reduce this be shifting to low carbon sources/renewables
- offset what you can't by capture/planting etc

Glasgow might be a tiny drop in the emissions problem globally; but it sends the right message, and its important to lead by example
- China will catch up very soon, India less so & Australia when there's f'all left of it
- sd