X R rebellion at Canary Wharf this morning

There's no need to cause criminal damage to get your point across, it's stupid, people using vandalism as an excuse, these people are causing trouble for troubles sake, I bet half of them don't even know why they're protesting, they see a riot and join in, it's a shame the police are no longer allowed to use water cannons, they'd be my first option.

It is not easy to inform people who are information-deprived. Everyone likes to have their own point of view endorsed (confirmation bias) and most people get their info from friends and relations , or social media. Not quality sources.

This is why directed violence gets people talking, and at least expressing their prejudices.

Yes Trisher, there were millions at that peaceful Stop the War demo, and it was completely ignored.

Some may be interested to see this article from the New York Times?
I’ve read the comments above and would just say that it’s very likely that the MSM does not report truthfully about the extent of damage being caused to our planet. Time really is running out.
www.nytimes.com/2021/04/22/climate/climate-change-economy.html?campaign_id=51&emc=edit_mbe_20210423&instance_id=29583&nl=morning-briefing%3A-europe-edition®i_id=131002972&segment_id=56160&te=1&user_id=c0d8ac0e7f4d45c8f1e1f26f2fb3d29b

If and when X-R arrive near you, and damages your property or buildings you feel you have a right to visit or work in safely I hope you will be equally understanding.
XR seem to have little understanding about the carbon footprint for replacement. There is much more awareness and many more people are doing what they can-a drop in the ocean compared with what the world needs, granted but better than doing nothing.
I wonder if the protesters then drove off home in their fuel-guzzling cars, to clean up in their fossil fuel powered bathrooms, then settled down to admire themselves on the electrically powered TV and use their environmentally costly devices, (as we do when posting on here), to post their opinions on how useful it is to smash up property to get your views heard.

I am sorry XR have protested in your area - we have had protests ad nauseum in Bristol over the last two years, the result being that all the sympathy they MIGHT have had for their aims has disappeared. They are totally useless - remember the protest when they were climbing on top of tube trains? You know, public transport! Every single one of their useless protests has caused environmental damage - I have no time for these people who cause damage without suggesting any useful solutions. Fortunately they have stopped protesting in Bristol - apart from a few who have joined in with the "Kill the Bill" protests - something us residents are also well and truly sick of!

Alegrias1

I think your information is a bit behind the times Katie59

ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth

I'm not convinced by nuclear; I don't understand how we cope with the by-products.

Thank you for the explanation Cunco

From your own attachment Onshore wind is cheap. But we don’t do much in the UK, ours is mostly offshore at 4 times the cost, maybe in the future that can be done without subsidy but it hasn’t happened yet.
I fully support renewable but I do recognize the limitations and the cost that we are all going to have to pay

I think your information is a bit behind the times Katie59

ourworldindata.org/cheap-renewables-growth

I'm not convinced by nuclear; I don't understand how we cope with the by-products.

Thank you for the explanation Cunco

“there is lots of money to be made from alternative energy sources “

Only with government subsidies, renewable power is far more expensive than fossil fuels. Offshore wind is particularly expensive, solar is less but is only a small part of the energy mix, when battery storage is added it won’t be cheap. Nuclear too not cheap over its lifespan and controversial too.

Many of us have solar panels filled on the FIT scheme, that has ended, virtually none have been bought since.

Indeed it is,, but for for all the wrong reasons!

My passing reference to a Green Dictatorship reflected the third of Extinction Rebellion's 3 key steps as reported by the BBC in April 2019:

The government must, in their words, "tell the truth" about the scale of the crisis the world now faces.

Secondly, the UK must enact legally binding policies to reduce carbon emissions to net zero by 2025.

The third step is the formation of a Citizens' Assembly to "oversee the changes" that will be needed to achieve this goal.

As it happens, I have been a conserver and recycler all my life, initially out of need and subsequently by habit. I do not know if we will have a planetary climate disaster but it is not being kept a secret; and it has not gone unnoticed by governments, big business and the world at large.

Just vandalism. Easy high profile target. No doubt all the demonstrators are dressed in recycled natural clothing, they cycled to the venue, their flags are natural materials (not plastic) and there was no battery in their phone. Couldn't they demonstrate at car manufacturers who are producing cars with huge batteries that need resources taken from land and ocean beds. Solar panels, never advertised the resources used in their production. Vandalism is not the ways to make a point. Do hope whoever is responsible is charged and sentenced.

The only entities that can make a difference are the world’s governments and through legislation that will ensure big business complies.

We must all as individuals do our bit, but it is a drop in the ocean compared to the emissions by the process of production.

Cunco I would expect us to take our place in international negotiations and try to influence other parts of the world. Maybe lead by example? There seems to be a narrative along the lines that we are doing our part and these other countries aren't. So it allows some to say that its not fair and there's no point is us trying any more. I'm not suggesting that is what you are saying, not at all.

I am a bit taken aback by the "Green dictatorship" comment though, which seems to suggest that you might think governments who decide on environmentally friendly policies are not democratic? Environmentally friendly policies don't have to be negative, there is lots of money to be made from alternative energy sources and so on and they don't have to make our lives miserable!

GrannyGravy13

Mining for lithium which is used in batteries which power phones, tablets, laptops and electric vehicles is destroying areas of South America and Tibet. Killing all surrounding wildlife and polluting rivers and water courses.

This is what the search for alternative to fossil fuels is doing to the world. Many articles on line for those who want to
see for themselves.

That thought worries me too. Whatever we do as humans, we cause damage.

Alegrias1: What else would you have the UK do if it fully complies with international agreements and if, big if, it cuts emissions to 78% of 1990 levels by 2035, said to be an exacting target by international standards? We are constantly being reminded how insignificant the UK is on the world stage and, in respect of emissions, it is certainly true.

I agree with Katie59 that governments (at least democratic governments) can only go so far. Thereafter, it is up to individuals. As we have witnessed in the pandemic, people don't always do what they are told; and, as regards climate control, some of the elite don't practise what they preach.

Of course, there are those who would prefer we had a less democratic government to ensure its edicts were followed but even with a green dictatorship in Whitehall, we would not make a significant difference to global emissions.

“If you don’t like XR’s approach, you need to propose an effective alternative.”

The only way to reduce emissions is to reduce global consumption, if consumer goods were less affordable they would have to last longer, so a big tax on consumer goods, across all developed countries as a start would reduce emissions.

Is it going to happen, not a chance, never.

I think Extinction Rebellion have done their cause no good at all - it is awful to think of all the litter left and damage to buildings - they are so weird - I vote Green in local elections because they can do quite a lot for the area in which you live.

The UK has a very ambitious climate change target to meet, I really don’t see the point of a protest in London, our CO2 emissions are tiny, China and the US are the major polluters contributing nearly half, of the CO2. China is still increasing emissions, mainly because we and other western nations have just “exported” our pollution to China
Of course it’s consumer demand that drives Chinese industry, until we all starts consuming less there is going to be no decrease in emissions, it’s not up to government it’s up to all of us.
In reality global emissions are not going to fall because demand from developing nations and population growth are going to maintain demand, the best we are going to achieve is leveling off increase.

We shouldn't console ourselves with the fact that things are being "acted upon". We've picked the low hanging fruit and now it gets hard.

As for the China thing - do we just carry on regardless because Chinese emissions are much worse than ours? We have international agreements and action about this because everybody has to act. There's no point is us saying we've done our bit so now its up to them. When the sea levels go up, and our coastlines start to disappear, saying its all China's fault won't make it any better.

'So far government is all talk and not much action.'

UK CHG emissions down 43% since 1990 with targets of 57% reduction by 2030 and 78% by 2035.

'Passing the buck to China etc just won’t do.' Maybe not but UK accounts for just 1% of global emissions and China 28% [August 2020]. USA accounts for 15%, India 7% and Russia 5%. The plain fact is that whatever we do in the UK will not change the world, however much we wish it would.

I cannot vouch for this information which has been taken from the Internet. If accurate, though, it suggests the message has been heard is being acted upon and, indeed to some extent, has been acted upon since 1990. It may not be fast enough but it is not all talk.

Janburry

Whitewavemark2 caught our attention yes but all l thought about was the violence and not the subject, l support the ideals but I'm sure there must be a better way to get the point across. Every peace rally I've seen on TV ended in violence and destruction its very sad

No they haven't I attended a "Stop The War" march and there was no destruction and no violence just a lot of people walking for peace. Mind you it failed anyway so perhaps peaceful protest doesn't actually work.

The idea that this is just about some poor children in the third world is about as stupid as believing everyone believed women should have the vote.
Criminal damage is always condemned by some at the time. It is only later when the objectives are acheived that people say "oh well we knew they would get it anyway". No they wouldn't!!!

Actually I dont think that's coherent at all. I dont like simplistic solutions to complex problems.

Well said @Whitewavemark2. The objectives of Extinction Rebellion are totally clear, contrary to some claims here. They are spelled out in three simple points in large letters at extinctionrebellion.uk/the-truth/demands/. The CO2 implications of their action are trivial in the context of global emissions. So far government is all talk and not much action. Meanwhile banks push things further along the path of destruction. Passing the buck to China etc just won’t do. Why would they accept use telling them to do things we aren’t prepared to do? We have an impending crisis. If you don’t like XR’s approach, you need to propose an effective alternative.