![]() ![]() ![]() |
|
I really don't give a hoot about global warming and climate change it's already too late to stop what we r doing it's taken off and we can't stop it no matter what we do so i leave this post with an ok boomer to all you climate change activists peace out people
Examples
Mid Summer in Canberra, but climate change causes more weather, more evaporation, so more falling rain/hail
Same thing, more weather, in this case an historic blizzard. When temps pump more water upstairs it has to fall somewhere, somehow.
by not being able to afford the cost of building a new house https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/sustainable-living/118799141/new-houses-emitting-five-times-too-much-carbon--study
Batman:
by not being able to afford the cost of building a new house https://www.stuff.co.nz/life-style/homed/sustainable-living/118799141/new-houses-emitting-five-times-too-much-carbon--study
Its a fake article. It starts off sounding like NZ homes are 5 times worse than others. But its based on the 2050 target, its a target problem not a house problem. If the target was next week then Kiwi houses would be emitting thousands of % too much. Its clickbait. It concludes by saying that NZ houses are low emitters due to us using wood more and 80% green electricity.
MikeB4: @tdgeek fake article? No not really. We don't build houses for just next week, we build them for the next 100 years plus.
No idea of your point, Mike. Our houses are apparently 5 times too many emissions, thats incorrect. Our houses are emissions friendly. The article starts out that our houses emit too much, thats fake, they dont
I didnt say we build houses just for next week, you misread something. My point was that if the target was next week, and not 2050 then our bad houses would be emitting many thousands of % too much. The writer seemed to need to pick on something so he picked on our bad emitting houses, thats fake news
That is a valid point. Houses made of alternative materials like (locally sourced) straw and mud appear to be superior to traditional materials for characteristics like insulating properties and durability and probably other things as well. I'm not sure if much is being done in this area here, or what problems there would be with consents, but overseas I think there has been a lot more innovation in this area.
Plesse igmore amd axxept applogies in adbance fir anu typos
MikeB4: Look around a house being built today. How may plastics, Aluminium, and other emission intensive products. How far have the products travelled and how. How much of the construction, furnishing and finishes are made from non renewable materials.
I fully agree. That however wasn't the point of that article. The article decided our houses are bad, solely due to picking on the 2050 date, despite that fact that the houses are emissions efficient compared to other countries and that they will last 100 years.
We certainly should look at improving the houses as you suggested although I cant say Ive ever read anyone discussing that in the media. We could use more wood, but wooden exteriors and window frames are probably not the way to go as they will degrade over time. If plastics were recycled then using them is no issue, that therefore goes back to NZ's poor recycling record, we use many plastics that cannot be recycled. Wooden floors on piles would help too
Rikkitic:
That is a valid point. Houses made of alternative materials like (locally sourced) straw and mud appear to be superior to traditional materials for characteristics like insulating properties and durability and probably other things as well. I'm not sure if much is being done in this area here, or what problems there would be with consents, but overseas I think there has been a lot more innovation in this area.
Agree, we could do more, but we could do more with everything, but we don't. It might cost money and it might cost votes, thats the problem
My point is, being "ok" compared to other countries is nowhere good enough. Houses built of sustainable timber such as Pine is the way to go including windows, cladding/interior walls, piles and roofing. Plastics are not sustainable. I agree recycled plastics are away of dealing with the abomination now but the aim must always be to rid ourselves of them and the sooner the better.
The use of plastics and other "man made' products such as composite wood products (e.g custom wood) in the home add to making our homes a toxic living environment contributing to poor health and of course their production is not at all environmentally friendly.
MikeB4:
My point is, being "ok" compared to other countries is nowhere good enough. Houses built of sustainable timber such as Pine is the way to go including windows, cladding/interior walls, piles and roofing. Plastics are not sustainable. I agree recycled plastics are away of dealing with the abomination now but the aim must always be to rid ourselves of them and the sooner the better.
The use of plastics and other "man made' products such as composite wood products (e.g custom wood) in the home add to making our homes a toxic living environment contributing to poor health and of course their production is not at all environmentally friendly.
Fair enough, although I feel that an all pine house would fail, and begin to cause more issues with damp and losing heat etc.
Remember we can emit CO2, we just need to reduce it. The Earth needs CO2 in the atmosphere. But your points needs to be raised to EVERYTHING. We are better to make gains on everything than big gains on some things and TBH I doubt that all wood houses would work. Take cars. The EV brigade get angry when they read that a Suzuki Swift will get a subsidy. Well, that car reduces emissions. But thats a problem. Maybe tell them not to buy an EV and just walk? Yes thats better solution but it wont happen
In my opinion I dont buy into massive emmission cuts by being radical, as they just wont happen. Its far more achievable to make more modest gains over ALL products and services, that can be achievable.
Interesting article on the population size's role in all this to be found in the current issue of North & South.
|
![]() ![]() ![]() |