The Great Global Warming Debate


The whole thing is a farce of epic proportions, buying goods that could be made locally or even within Europe rather than shipping stuff all around the world is a huge emitter. Shipping ores to China to be smelted and processed is shocking even before we account for their terrible environmental controls while doing so. Cheap disposable goods…populations ever increasing despite natural rates levelling off in the developed world…

Etc etc.

But never deal with that, don’t even mention it. Instead we will all cramp in higher density and live in a ‘green’ version of 1984 while the rich emit whatever they want, tax free, on their cruise ships and yachts, the leaders of industry will continue to make a killing through cheap Asian labour - or wherever in the world it’ll be next- the environment be damned because the average Joe will supposedly make up for their emissions


A repeat of a rant I had a while back

It’s better to look at the root cause of the environmental issues we’re facing than to be looking at carbon taxation that simply allows corporations to win twice.

The biggest cause of global pollution is excessive production for consumerism.

Put simply this is because they produce far in excess of what is actually needed the global needs can be sustained with production levels of at least half of their current rates.


Because of the use of “planned obsolescence” a mechanism that artificially reduces the functional life of a product such that you are forced to replace it frequently , for example a washing machine can easily be designed to run for 25-30 years, but in fact fails in as tittle as sis years, just after the five year warranty runs out! This is deliberate design function to ensure future sales of replacement product.

It is also exasperated by the fact that spares are often difficult to obtain and with many products are impossible to repair due to the design of the product that prevent basic repairs from being carried out.

LED lamps are another example, after 40 years of electronics experience, I know that LEDs have an extremely long life if the electronics are properly designed 30,000 hours plus should be expected, but manufacturers are now bringing that down to less that 10,000 by designing the power supply to fail earlier with underrated components that will fail in about 10,000 hours.

These are just two examples of domestic devices that are designed to fail before their time to increase the profit margins for businesses and their shareholders.

In other areas, millions of plastic products are made with plastics that are designed to deteriorate far quicker than necessary to produce repeat purchases,

Shoes have soles made of materials that wear much faster than they should.

Cars used to be really bad before there was a consumer backlash in the 1970-80s after many deaths caused by cars that were designed to rust quickly getting involved in crashes and causing deaths by completely crushing as they were weakened by corrosion, or in some cases causing crashes by breaking up while being driven.

Then there is “perceived obsolescence” where consumers are being pressurised into replacing stuff that is perfectly functional with the latest and greatest model, which is usually the same as the previous one except for some more go-faster stripes or similar. The fashion industry is the worst offender here.

Then there is all the “single use” plastics to reduce costs in a fast food restaurant for example, to avoid paying for someone to wash dishes afterwards.

Finally to add insult to injury, there is a whole “recycling & waste management” industry created to get rid of all this rubbish.

People just need to know what is happening in the world, whinging about climate change is a cop out, they need to be looking at their own consumerism and the corporate greed that is feeding it.


But most consumption growth is among the rising poor in non western countries. Rich folk, like you,have not had much consumption growth is the last few decades. So the “rampant consumerism” argument is a purely “I’m all right Jack” and sod the foreign poor.

As for shoddy modern build of consumer goods, thats easy. In all the examples I know of the main driving force has been government regulations driven the Green and Econuts agenda. A new “energy efficient” washing machine will not last very long before breaking, and wash badly, but a 20 or 30 year old machine which is not “energy efficient” lasts a very long time. A few more decades. And washes efficiently.

This is true of all white goods. The old stuff works and last a long time. The new “energy efficient” stuff breaks after a few years and does the job badly.

My 30 year old car is very easy (and cheap) to repair and keep going for 200K/250K miles. A newer “energy efficient” car will start have serious and costly repair issues after 100K. If you are lucky. The cost of basic repairs on an older Prius are about 2x / 3x of a 20 / 30 year old BMW or Mercedes. The total energy use balance sheet of running a very old easy to repair not “energy-efficient” car looks far better than hybrids or EV’s. Which dont last as long. So end up in the breakers yard.

Then we have the energy cost of recycling. Another huge joke. Even for the small fraction that is not shipped around the world to be incinerated or land-filled.

Now all electronics will not last very long because of no-lead solder. Because of the Greens. Because lead is bad.

When Ralph Nader et al ranted about “planned obsolesce” back in the 1960’s and 1970’s there was enough evidence at the time to support some of the examples they used. But that political shtick has not been valid for many decades.

As for increasing profits for “shareholders”. Guess who most of the “shareholders” are, directly or indirectly. Pension funds and private investment funds used by individuals. You want your private pension to be there when you retire. Or you savings to get a reasonable rate of return. Then you better hope that companies are doing their best to guarantee a long term business. No point creating a product that last 50 years if it puts you out of business in 10 or 20. By competitors who build products that dont last as long but are cheaper.

The rest of what you wrote sounds like the typical affluent suburbanite parading of guilt that quickly veers in to the rant of the interfering busy body prohibitionist. Because when you start seeing the Green and Eco’ as nothing more than New Age Prohibitionism then it starts making much more sense. Exactly the same type of affluent interfering busybodies people driving the movement as in past generations with other prohibitionist movements. The same framing in black and white moral terms. The Believers are the Morally Good, the scoffers are Morally Evil. The usual political evangelicalsim and secular missionary BS.

As for ATG. A pure scientific fraud. As blatant as Lysenkoism or Piltdown Man. A scientific fraud where the key magnitude value on which the whole edifice is built assumes that the surface of the earth has no intrinsic temperature and the oceans have no geological external heating source. ATG only works if you completely and totally ignore the geology of the earth. A far more reputable and robust science than atmospheric physics. Build a model which does not assume a 0 Kelvin earth surface and just watch the 33 Kelvin “surface greenhouse effect” constant become a 3 Kelvin constant. On a good day.

And with 3 Kelvin constant you have not even a basic ATG model that has any mathematical validity. Even on a white board.

All politicized science is pseudo-science. Always was, always will be.


Consumption growth in the west, it’s good that it is slowing down, despite manufacturers ramping up on planned obsolescence to reduce the life of products.

You’re missing the point about appliance longevity, it does not matter what the energy efficiency, it is all about the “built to fail” It is very easy to make appliances that are efficient to pass all the laws and to last 20-30 years with some fairly simple changes in manufacturing that could at most add 30% to the price of it. What would you prefer one machine for €900 that lasts 25 years or five machines @ €600.

This is why planned obsolescence is so damaging to the environment.
The solution is for governments to mandate a minimum expected product life and ensure the “right to repair” is open to all.

As for the remainder of your post, I’ll leave that to you and your god to resolve.


Do people still believe global warming or have the people woken up yet?


The Church of Global Warning is the old church, and Coronavirus is like the radical (varaint) new-church that appeared overnight, even though they worship the same entity, it all relies on the new-age of paganism being manifested globally, that has required the re-tribalisation of the world (identity politics) to usher in, the new-old-order as the new-world-order. It’s kind of clever branding but does not stand up to much scrutiny once you assembled all the parts and see the whole. When you do that;

Prepare to be cast as a heretic and persecuted accordingly.


I’ve been hearing the conspiracy theory about “planned obsolesce” as some kind of nefarious scheme by evil capitalists for almost 50 years by this stage. Total bullshit. Invariably by people who have little or no knowledge of product development, manufacturing or business for that matter.

All product engineering is a trade off between costs long term business survival and market competition. The examples you gave are either from many decades ago or else seeing a conspiracy when there was straight forward cost engineering reasons involved. Why build a 50 year power supply for a 10/20 year consumer product. Like a lamp.

I can think of a whole bunch of products I have owned in the past that failed prematurely. Always due to bad engineering rather than some evil scheme concocted by senior management. Why did Walkmans in the 1980’s have the headphone socket directly attached to the PCB board. Because it reduced the BOM and COM by about 3%. Which when the total net margins were calculated, not great with consumer electronics, was enough to make a real difference to the business suitability of the product line.

Why did the first generation iPhone / iPod Touch button fail so quickly making it unusable. Because the guy who made the original engineering decision screwed up. Fixed in later models.

The difference between these examples and the ones I gave with white goods is that white goods and now all consumer electronic will have much shorter life span due to the crank religion of “sustainability” and “energy efficiency”.

Why should I have to trade utility, product longetivity and convenient just because it offends moral sensibilities of a bunch of interfering busybodies and cranks. Dont buy this stuff if you think it is somehow morally repugnant. If you want to lead a morally superior life because you and only you can see through the capitalist conspiracy of planned obsolesce and related issues then so be it. But dont try to force other people to live with a greatly reduced standard of living just because you dont really understand the economics of consumer product manufacturing.

There again there is nothing new in anything you said. The same kind of moaning about how stupid other people buying lots of “useless tat” was being made 2000 years ago. I think I remember Juvenal make a couple of swipes at the great unwashed on this particular subject.


You’re going off on a tangent again, anyway may I present the Dooby Lamp.
Low energy and long life are easily achievable with the right incentives.

The main reason power supplies for most gadgets last so well is simply down to legistration that ensures that they remain safe for their working lives as well as the product they power usually fails first.

The fact that manufacturers are using “green regulations” as an excuse to cheapen & shorten their products operational life is nothing short of criminal! You know that as well as I do, but you’re defending it.


Quality, Speed and Price.

Current Public Sentiment towards the Housing Market

The issue is with the quality, small changes in certain key parts can have a huge difference to longevity, the waste involved in building short lived products is astoundingly large.
A process made worse by manufacturers who install “countdown to death” timers in their products when they are unable to make the physical unit flimsy enough to last the warrenty period and fail shortly afterwards.


Transport & Environment estimated that about 50,000 people a year in Europe die prematurely because of pollution from the shipping sector as a whole.[9][8] This primarily affects people who live in harbour cities.[8] In some cruise ports such as Southampton, children may be exposed to the polluted air when school’s playgrounds are located near the docks.[8] In Marseille, residents have been diagnosed with respiratory-related cancers at abnormally high rates after the cruise industry boomed.[9]

Aside from the locals, measuring has shown that passengers themselves are also exposed to heightened concentrations of nitrogen oxides during their voyage.[6] For example, Canadian environmental researchers, which had secretly conducted air quality tests at various times and places aboard four Carnival Corporation cruises, reported in 2019 that they ‘found that levels of ultra-fine particulate matter at the back of the ship behind the smokestacks while the ship was moving that were comparable to some of the world’s most like Beijing and Santiago.’

reviewed the emissions of 77 cruise ships (almost the entire fleet in European waters), concluding that only one of them, AIDAnova, was not powered by highly polluting heavy fuel, but relatively ‘clean’ liquefied natural gas (LGN), which reduces NOx and particulate emissions by about 80%. However, even though shifting all cruise ships to LGN would be very beneficial to human health, LGN also contains methane, which is a very potent greenhouse gas and would increase global warming significantly.[6]


So 50k die a year from pollution, but don’t change to gas, even if you’ll reduce the deaths 80%, because it might get warmer and sea levels would rise.

Sea levels will rise and fall, its like fighting the tides. Anyway the Dutch live below sea level.

The stink of it all


Electric, carbon neutral cars were never going to be enough…


And to think that Eamonn Ryan is a moderate among the greens? smh. This is the guy who fifteen years ago wanted us all driving diesel cars.


Have you any actual experience of the product development process, manufacturing or even businesses that sell to the consumer or end user? That has customers.

If you cannot sell your product you have no cash to make payroll and you are out of business.

If you cannot sell products that survive in the market place, people dont keep buying your product but your competitors, you eventually go out of business. Your employees lose their jobs.

Over the last 100 years huge amounts of data has been collected on customers preferences, how they change over time, product use, product preferences etc. The two most important numbers are how much people are willing to pay for a product of a certain quality, and how long will a product be used before being replaced. The both change over time. Both going lower over time due to increasing affluence and technological improvement.

The longer a product design lifetime the more expensive it is. Due to capacitor rot and related problems a 30 year powers supply is at least 5 times more expensive that a 10 year power supply. Because removing a few cheap capacitors with something that will last much longer is actually very expensive. Now when that power supply is coupled with a consumer product whose typical market lifespan is ten years…

And so on.

The problem with all “Green” regulations is that they are the result of a political ideology held overwhelming my affluent middle class self-righteous busy bodies who have little or no understanding of large parts of the modern economy, technology, or even science for that matter. And the Law of Unintended Consequences is completely beyond them.

The Greens/Ecos pass laws and regulations which actually make consumer products more fragile and with shorter effective life times. And the consumer product manufacturers build exactly to those regulations. Its not the consumer product manufacturers fault I cannot buy a new washing machine that will last 30 plus years, washes effectively, and is easy to repair. It is completely due to government green regulations. Which is why my next washing machine will be a refurbished old one. Made when manufacturers could still build purely to engineering specs, not some crank politically motivated regulations.

Actually thinking back over the last four decades I cannot think of one single regulation or law passed purely for Green/Eco reasons where I thought - “now thats a good idea.” Its always been - how fucking stupid are these people. Every single reg was head-shakingly stupid and always caused unintended problems down the line.

Here is a perfect example which will be in the news again soon. The Green / Ecos ultras decided that all man set fires in California needed permits and environmental impact reports. Even though the landscape was manged by man-set first for at least 7 thousand years. Because of air pollution and greenhouse gas emissions were “evil”. Result almost all controlled burns ended (impossible / too expensive to get permits) and two decades later large parts of the state now burn every year during the dry season and most of the state has the worst air quality in almost 100 years. And the biggest single loss of old growth forest and valuable ecological areas in over 140 years. With no end in sight because it will take decades to undo the damage done by the “green” regulations.

And the point is? Green/ Eco politics and every regulation and law it creates has the same catastrophic long effect as that other ideology of collective stupidly, Marxism. Good intentions and nothing else, always causes mayhem. One way or another.




Ryan sold out to WEF years ago.



Why would 80% of us live in cities when most can now work from home