Guardian Climate Survey. Source Few willing to change lifestyle to save the planet, climate survey finds, Fair Use, Low Resolution Image to Identify the Topic

Guardian Climate Survey: “Few Willing to Change…”

Guest essay by Eric Worrall

According to The Guardian, most people surveyed already believe they are doing more than their fair share to save the planet from climate change.

Few willing to change lifestyle to save the planet, climate survey finds

Exclusive: poll of 10 countries including US, UK, France and Germany finds people prioritising measures that are already habits

Jon Henley @jonhenley
Mon 8 Nov 2021 03.28 AEDT

Citizens are alarmed by the climate crisis, but most believe they are already doing more to preserve the planet than anyone else, including their government, and few are willing to make significant lifestyle changes, an international survey has found.

“The widespread awareness of the importance of the climate crisis illustrated in this study has yet to be coupled with a proportionate willingness to act,” the survey of 10 countries including the US, UK, France and Germany, observed.

The survey found that 62% of people surveyed saw the climate crisis as the main environmental challenge the world was now facing, ahead of air pollution (39%), the impact of waste (38%) and new diseases (36%).

But when asked to rate their individual action against others’ such as governments, business and the media, people generally saw themselves as much more committed to the environment than others in their local community, or any institution.

Only 51% said they would definitely take individual climate action, with 14% saying they would definitely not and 35% torn. People in Poland and Singapore (56%) were the most willing to act, and in Germany (44%) and the Netherlands (37%) the least.

Read more: https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2021/nov/07/few-willing-to-change-lifestyle-climate-survey

The quasi-religious green demands for ritual recycling, and other belief building exercises, appear to some extent to have backfired. People who conscientiously sort their trash into the correct bins, and use less plastic, or whatever, already feel they are doing their bit to save the world from climate change. I never got a straight answer from politicians about what happens to recycled trash, I strongly suspect much of it ends up in landfill, or dumped in the sea.

Concern about the cost of climate action was a major factor, 69% said they needed more public resources, while 60% said they can’t afford to make the effort required. There is also a strong perception of disagreement amongst experts, so the public is clearly skeptical about claims there is a near 100% scientific consensus.

The cost concern is intriguing from a number of perspectives. Greens have clearly failed to sell the idea that renewables are cheaper than fossil fuel. Another possible interpretation, and this is only speculation, is people might be nervous about giving straight answers, preferring to conceal their skepticism behind financial concerns. Yet people still vote for green leaning politicians in large numbers, so there must be some level of concern amongst ordinary people.

33% of respondents agreed they “don’t have the headspace to think about it”, so a significant minority of people appear to be fed up with wall to wall climate message.

I think it will take more than a Guardian survey to tease out what is really happening, but my key takeaway is ordinary people are reluctant to embrace more radical climate action.

5 13 votes
Article Rating
127 Comments
Oldest
Newest Most Voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
H.R.
November 8, 2021 10:35 pm

Everywhere is warming twice as fast as everywhere else and everyone is doing twice as much to prevent the Climate Change as everyone else.

M’kay. Then it should all balance out.

Let’s just declare victory and everybody go home.

Zig Zag Wanderer
Reply to  H.R.
November 8, 2021 10:39 pm

Ha! Beat me to it…

gringojay
Reply to  H.R.
November 9, 2021 12:08 am

Victors in virtue signaling won’t stay at home.

925F0C71-0B00-4F84-AC36-253E2AFBE7A0.jpeg
griff
Reply to  gringojay
November 9, 2021 1:45 am

coal only provides 2% and falling of UK electricity….

Alba
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 2:06 am

So what? The UK is not the world.
Germany: Coal tops wind as primary electricity source
In the first half of 2021, coal shot up as the biggest contributor to Germany’s electric grid, while wind power dropped to its lowest level since 2018. Officials say the weather is partly to blame.
https://www.dw.com/en/germany-coal-tops-wind-as-primary-electricity-source/a-59168105

Electricity in the United States is generated using a variety of resources. The three most common are natural gas, coal, and nuclear power. 
https://www.epa.gov/energy/about-us-electricity-system-and-its-impact-environment

31.9% of electricity in Japan is generated using coal.
https://www.statista.com/statistics/745675/japan-share-of-electricity-production/

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Alba
November 9, 2021 9:44 am

Sorry, griff is Britain’s village idiot.

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  Alba
November 9, 2021 10:07 am

If BP suggest that by 2035 renewables will only be delivering 10% of energy demand and that fossil fuels – with coal at around 25% of total generation – will be responsible for improvement of human welfare, what magic will suddenly be able to replace them?

tygrus
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 2:44 am

The increased gas use fills that gap when coal is replaced & the wind stops blowing (plus imports from neighbours not all green). So it’s still fossil fuel but maybe half the CO2e.
Climate action sounds great as long as someone else pays or subsidises. When activists have to put their money where their mouths are they hesitate & blame everyone else with lots of ‘buts’.
Despite the claims of green energy being cheaper, its use is not completely practical nor fully economical. Some tech has gotten better over the last 20yrs but how much longer will it take to solve all the problems?

Michael in Dublin
Reply to  tygrus
November 9, 2021 10:15 am

We need many small – with emphasis on small – pilot projects testing for cleaner alternatives that will be practical and economical before implementing wishful regulations and schemes that cannot guarantee beneficial energy innovation.

Gary Pearse
Reply to  Michael in Dublin
November 12, 2021 5:50 pm

I’ll bet there is not a feasibility study to be found in the climateering industry. The technologies have not been subjected to meaningful trials and they even naively admit future innovations will be necessary, e.g. storage batteries for an all-renewable grid WIILL be developed.

Govs and NGOs have decided ICE cars will not be manufactured after 2030! This is before research on all-electric systems have been completed. E-Cars, buses and grid batteries regularly burst into flames!

They are going to find out really quickly why industry goes to the trouble and expense of doing proper feasibility studies for major projects. The climate psychosis will need several hundred percent contingency allotment and it might never be made to work.

Ben Vorlich
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 3:02 am

Gas and nuclear on most days more than 50%, even on a breezy, windier than usual, day like today it’s 55%. add today’s coal and it’s 59.2%. Your much vaunted wind is at 23.11%.

DocSiders
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 5:37 am

Quit feeding the Trolls…unless you enjoy arguing with 3 year olds.

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 5:43 am

Wood chips aren’t much better, no matter what some European morons say.

ResourceGuy
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 6:13 am

Partly because of the wood pellet transport and burning, burning, burning

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 6:27 am

The UK is not a very big place and certainly has little influence on the composition of the atmosphere.
They have less than 1% of world population.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 6:28 am

Is the UK the same place that pays to have wood shipped from across an ocean, which they then burn for energy, so they can say they do not use coal?

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Nicholas McGinley
November 9, 2021 9:45 am

Yes. We have people like griff in charge. Sadly.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 6:46 am

Isn’t Drax about to convert back to coal?
A couple more really cold winters when wind and solar fail to provide the needed power, and coal will start becoming popular again.

Gerry, England
Reply to  MarkW
November 11, 2021 5:41 am

Drax only half converted to burning American forests. The government refused them more taxpayers cash to convert the rest of it so it is still coal-fired. That means it can be paid huge sums to generate when the grid is on the edge such that last week it received £4000/MWh as opposed to the normal £70/MWh – all paid for by electricity users.

Bryan A
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 7:46 am

Current Global Energy mix has Fossil Fuel consumption providing more than 84% of energy usage
Oil 33.1%
Coal 27%
Gas 24.3%
Fossil 84.4%

Nuclear 4.3%
& Hydro 6.4%

Renewables
Wind 2.2%
Solar 1.1%
Bio 0.7%
Other 0.9%

Wow, it looks like global renewable energy production has finally passed Nuclear at 4.9% to 4.3% respectively

Coal may not be #1 but it is a close #2 and is producing 13 times the energy of wind and 25 times the energy of solar GLOBALLY

https://ourworldindata.org/energy-mix

Despite producing more and more energy from renewables each year, the global energy mix is still dominated by coal, oil, and gas. Not only does most of our energy – 84% of it – come from fossil fuels, we continue to burn more each year: total production has increased from 116,214 to 136,761 TWh in the last 10 years.

Last edited 10 months ago by Bryan A
John
Reply to  Bryan A
November 9, 2021 4:36 pm

would be interested to know the numbers based on actual GWh rather than a % which is more likely based on name plate capacity rather than actual delivered real power

Megs
Reply to  John
November 9, 2021 8:19 pm

I don’t know how wind and solar get away with applying a nameplate capacity on infrastructure that can only supply around 30% and 24% output respectively. You need three times the infrastructure to achieve the nameplate capacity of traditional forms of power generation.

Wind and solar are pot luck capacity and the others are engineered to provide their nameplate capacity 24/7.

Bryan A
Reply to  John
November 9, 2021 8:20 pm

Go to my included link and click on the graphs to display the actuals

spock
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 11:30 pm

The Griff is back, taking time off from yankin’ off to his Greta poster.

Deprogram yourself with these two great books.

The moral case for fossil fuels
http://library.lol/main/95AC3FC1E1D3768A2FF58A9556284B4E

Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom
http://library.lol/main/62F19352A7FD8FA7830C90D187094289

bonbon
Reply to  gringojay
November 9, 2021 1:53 am

Those EV cars are parked too close – a fire chain-reaction possibility will give insurers plenty to chew over – an EV Chernobyl is not covered by most policies!

Tee McShane
Reply to  gringojay
November 9, 2021 2:52 am

To claim global warming is an invented crisis is the depth of arrogant ignorance.
And do FULL research this time–and going forward–on electric vehicles.
As ever, there’s NO shortage of stupidity, blindness and arrogance in this forum!

Trying to Play Nice
Reply to  Tee McShane
November 9, 2021 5:45 am

You’re correct, as long as you, Griff and the other trolls come here.

Richard Page
Reply to  Tee McShane
November 9, 2021 6:29 am

Anthropogenic Global Warming or Dangerous Anthropogenic Interference (the new buzz tla) IS an invented crisis. Climate change as a natural cyclical progression is very real and is no crisis. As to electric vehicles, readers on WUWT appear to have done far more research than you or most people have done – they are a fire hazard, far more likely to have a fire than other vehicles and those fires are extremely hazardous – spewing toxic fumes, CO and CO2 into the atmosphere. Take a good look in the mirror and ask yourself just whose ‘stupidity, blindness and arrogance’ you are showcasing here?

Last edited 10 months ago by Richard Page
MarkW
Reply to  Tee McShane
November 9, 2021 6:48 am

If it isn’t an invented crisis, you should have no problem coming up with some actual, real world evidence of it’s existence.
And no, citing fires, heat waves, floods, etc. that are less severe than have happened in the past is not evidence.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  MarkW
November 9, 2021 9:47 am

Nor is a greener planet and record food harvests. 😇

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Chaswarnertoo
November 9, 2021 1:45 pm

I was just checking crop reports that include the current years harvest in the US, and you are correct…yields and total production are at or above every previous year in the history of agriculture.
There is no indication whatsoever that the steady and rapid upwards trend in food production is even levelling off.
All crops on every continent on earth are at record production levels.
The rate of increase in recent decades is an exact match for the upward trend in atmospheric CO2 levels.
Not that anyone should be surprised, what with CO2 being the critical raw material for the entire biosphere.
Literally every molecule of every living thing we know of in the entire Universe is built from the molecules of CO2 in the air and water.
And by a stroke of shear serendipitous luck, the same stuff that has allowed us to create our modern civilization is increasing the amount of it above what are even still perilously low levels, and doing so each and every time we burn some more of it.

Last edited 10 months ago by Nicholas McGinley
ATheoK
Reply to  Tee McShane
November 9, 2021 7:06 am

A) There is no crisis, inverted or otherwise.
i) The international global warming institutions, UN, UNFCCC, IPCC and their supporting shaman bead shakers, e.g., IMF, have publicly acknowledged that the alleged global warming crisis is part of an attempt to redistribute Western wealth and institute global socialism.

B) Full research? As in officially noting that alleged renewable energy, solar arrays and wind farms, are far more expensive to install; are short lived compared to fossil fuel generating facilities; destroy land where wind farms or solar arrays are installed; produce inconsistent poor quality electricity, usually when it is not needed.

ii) Or by “FULL research” do you mean that they should investigate the mind boggling areas of land required for alleged renewable electricity sources.

iii) Or the mind boggling amounts of copper, cobalt, lithium, nickel, rare earths required to build even small renewable installations.

iv) Or the absurd levels of danger that come with lithium battery use?

v) Or the incredible amount of fossil fuels required to produce solar arrays and wind farms?

vi) Or the fact that when wind turbine lifecycles are finished, all laminates and fossil fuel resin produced components must be thrown in a landfill.

vii) Or the fact that many of the allegedly safe solar arrays contaminate any soils to which they are exposed? The glass enclosed solar cells are poisonous once the glass is broken.

C) “NO shortage of stupidity, blindness and arrogance“; you certainly accurately describe what you and the other trollops bring to this community. Their combined abject arrogant ignorance is complete and their refusal of knowledge makes their/your comments the epitome of stupidity.

Nicholas McGinley
Reply to  Tee McShane
November 9, 2021 1:34 pm

I do not say it is an invented crisis.
I observe that it is quite plainly a fake news story.
There is no crisis, whatsoever.
The weather is completely normal on every spot on the entire planet.
Nothing unusual is happening…anywhere!
All weather statistics and parameters are well within recorded historical norms.

Besides for that, we are living on a planet in an ice age!
And simpering ninnies like you have been tricked into thinking that a fraction of a degree of warming is an existential crisis.

If you ever wondered why there have always been dunces convinced the end of the world was nigh, you can stop now…people like you are the reason why.

Last edited 10 months ago by Nicholas McGinley
spock
Reply to  Tee McShane
November 9, 2021 11:32 pm

Read these, the two best books debunking climate change crap.

The moral case for fossil fuels
http://library.lol/main/95AC3FC1E1D3768A2FF58A9556284B4E

Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom
http://library.lol/main/62F19352A7FD8FA7830C90D187094289

SxyxS
Reply to  H.R.
November 9, 2021 1:49 am

I second that considering that we reached the point of no return a dozens of times.

oeman 50
Reply to  H.R.
November 9, 2021 6:40 am

Everyone is “above average.”

Zig Zag Wanderer
November 8, 2021 10:38 pm

Just as everywhere is heating up twice as fast as everywhere else, everyone is doing twice as much as everyone else to ‘fight’ Climate Change ™!

LdB
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 8, 2021 11:47 pm

Except China, Russia and Australia and we don’t even bother to pretend anymore.

Zig Zag Wanderer
November 8, 2021 10:44 pm

Yet people still vote for green leaning politicians in large numbers, so there must be some level of concern amongst ordinary people.

I think that is its just a symptom of the typical ‘somebody should do something about it’ mentality. People are always demanding that government ‘do something’. When it becomes clear that whatever government ‘does’ costs YOU money, the tune changes.

Unfortunately, most governments are very good at hiding the true reasons for additional costs. For example, in Australia, and I’m sure elsewhere, sharply rising electricity costs are blamed on ‘infrastructure costs’. What they don’t tell us is that these ‘infrastructure costs’ are directly caused by unreliables. Unreliables need more infrastructure to work, even if they work ineffectively anyway.

Last edited 10 months ago by Zig Zag Wanderer
RickWill
Reply to  Zig Zag Wanderer
November 9, 2021 1:04 am

It would be nice if governments just stood up and did something.

In Australia I would start with the Bureau of Meteorology – their corrupt cooking the books is a crime. Then CSIRO couldn’t operate a circus let along provide a stable electricity grid.

No doubt most countries have CO2 faith believers who deserve to be defunded so they go away.

The only climate emergency is make believe. There are real problems that need addressing – stop fiddling with make-believe problems.

Disputin
Reply to  RickWill
November 9, 2021 4:16 am

“CSIRO couldn’t operate a circus…”

Do you think it’s easy operating a circus? There are tickets to sell, sites to book, publicity to arrange, acts to book… All in all I’d think it’s a good deal easier than fiddling some temperature records.

Terry
November 8, 2021 11:11 pm

People vote for green leaning politicians more than others. Are there other than green leaning politicians in the UK? Watching from another country it sure doesn’t seem like it.

M Courtney
Reply to  Terry
November 9, 2021 12:02 am

No, there aren’t.
The BBC would tear them apart and then silence them.
It’s not worth the risk of standing up against the media onslaught if you want to achieve anything important.

Peta of Newark
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 1:45 am

Nailed it..
Sometimes I venture into the comments at msn uk.

I try to straighten a few things on renewable energy, climate and food but quickly losing the will.
They are a rabid, conclusion-jumping and ugly bunch that go there. Utterly convinced of their own goodness and everyone else’s badness. (Sound familiar?)
Its’ an education and especially I’ve discovered that if you put the word ‘vitamin‘ or ‘diet‘ into comment, that comment is marked as “under revue” then disappears and if you use the word “fat” (saturated fat, dietary fat, vegetable fat) you are in contravention of their guidelines

The very stuff that a mother’s milk is made of is now a derogatory and insulting term.
what are the words, where do you start to unravel this

bonbon
Reply to  Peta of Newark
November 9, 2021 1:57 am

Just wait – milk is white! And over at RT :

https://www.rt.com/op-ed/539705-uk-steam-trains-colonial-racism/

That Flying Scotsman white steam plume is racist!

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Peta of Newark
November 9, 2021 9:49 am

But I love you peta, when you post in English…

ATheoK
Reply to  Peta of Newark
November 11, 2021 3:31 pm

Words are your friends.

As soon as somebody decides to judge worth by certain words, start using synonym or if necessary Greek or Latin and other languages’ word antecedents.

e.g.,1) Milkfat – Cream, crème de la crème, butterfat, butter, upper crust, rises to the top, etc.

e.g., 2) Fat – Oleo, tallow, lard, ghee (butter after solids are removed), etc.

e.g., fat/oil – Latin – Oleum, adipatus, pingue, pinguedo, opimus, etc.

Be polite in your best oleaginous manner and use a new word that means the same…

Trust me! They’ll ban you before they finally include every possible synonym/meaning.

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 2:12 am

“It’s not worth the risk of standing up…”

too bad- that’s not the attitude of previous generations of Brits, that allowed them to build a vast empire, so that now the English language and many truly progressive values have spread across much of this planet

M Courtney
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 9, 2021 3:36 am

I think you miss the point.
Climate Change isn’t that important. It’s not the end of the world.

But there are lot of things that are important.

Think of it like this:
You have a rifle with one bullet in it (that bullet is your political career). Looking out you can see a grizzly bear somewhere alone in the distance and a tiger reaching into a baby’s cot right in front of you.
Which shot do you take?

Joseph Zorzin
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 3:40 am

I miss your point.

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 6:56 am

That grizzly also looks suspiciously like a guy in a costume.

ATheoK
Reply to  MarkW
November 11, 2021 3:34 pm

Really?
Fuzzy all over and stupid inside?

Yup, more leftists grapping every photo op.

Climate believer
November 8, 2021 11:23 pm

What an absolute farce of a survey, everyone says when asked “yes, I’m really concerned about the climate” like a “good citizen” should reply, but then when asked what are you doing about it……. errrr…. nothing.

Yeah right, reeeaaally concerned.

LdB
Reply to  Climate believer
November 8, 2021 11:49 pm

Well you don’t want to be publicly shamed …. those greentards are nasty.

Graemethecat
Reply to  LdB
November 10, 2021 12:04 am

Public shaming is the price to be paid when one rebuts the lies of the Green orthodoxy. Don’t be a coward.

Peter Wells
Reply to  Climate believer
November 9, 2021 5:36 am

Given how cold it has been in Florida since the first of the month, my observation is that we could use some more “global warming!”

ATheoK
Reply to  Climate believer
November 11, 2021 3:44 pm

You know the questions aren’t straightforward direct questions.

They’re more like, ‘Do you think the polar bear in this picture looks hungry and cute?’
Yes, means zealous alarmist lives here.

Or ‘Do you favor fossil fuel energy over solar or wind energy?’
No, means that you favor moderate monthly payments to fight climate change…

fretslider
November 8, 2021 11:47 pm

“Yet people still vote for green leaning politicians in large numbers,”

Eric, name a skeptical MP in the UK Parliament

Good luck with that- there aren’t any

John H
Reply to  fretslider
November 8, 2021 11:56 pm

Owen Paterson, oops just been driven out, wonder why.

fretslider
Reply to  John H
November 9, 2021 12:14 am

They’re all on the take he isn’t unique in that

M Courtney
Reply to  fretslider
November 9, 2021 3:39 am

They aren’t all on the take. That’s why he got castigated by almost everybody from all sides of the House (except for the very few who really are on the take, like the PM).

Richard Page
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 9:32 am

It’s the very few who aren’t on the take, in one form or another. Either they have other jobs in media, lobby firms or think tanks, or they are using expenses and kickbacks to supplement their already quite large incomes. The rules and requirements for MP’s need to be tightened, but who would do it – it’d be turkeys voting for Christmas again.

Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  fretslider
November 9, 2021 9:51 am

He actually wasn’t, most of the rest are.

John
November 8, 2021 11:51 pm

Interestingly the elephant in the room is the question on population control and decreasing the world population growth
Interesting the questions do not addressed how this can be achieved

Its not difficult see why anyone can or will believe all the other BS

As you see all these under educated spoilt little brats so called students of the world with silly posters complaining about the future and blaming every body else but still wearing designer clothes with there energy hungry apparel and mobile phones

unfortunately these under class elite have lost the ability to read write and do analysis

so it is no wonder why people are not interested

Kevin McNeill
Reply to  John
November 9, 2021 12:03 pm

There is already a control on population growth, it’s called prosperity. Once the third world starts to prosper like the West then the population will naturally come under control with no needed intervention from government.

Tom Abbott
Reply to  Kevin McNeill
November 9, 2021 1:44 pm

“There is already a control on population growth, it’s called prosperity”

That’s the solution.

It will take a little bit of good leadership. We don’t have that right now.

M Courtney
November 9, 2021 12:00 am

There is also a strong perception of disagreement amongst experts, so the public is clearly skeptical about claims there is a near 100% scientific consensus.

The survey asks about a consensus on solutions to save the planet. People believe that no-one knows what to do.

This makes sense. The Climate issue has been in the news for thirty years and no-one has come up with a plan that changes anything. Every single time a COP comes up it reminds people that nothing has changed.

The solution would be to publicly debate policies and costs. But the Greens cannot do that as they would lose the argument. They always lose the argument. That’s why they refuse to debate.

So the Green movement has lost.
Only the media haven’t noticed that. Probably because they have professional eco-campaigners masquerading as journalists (Environment Journalists) who keep their field safe from scrutiny in order to keep their jobs.

Peter Wells
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 5:44 am

I started studying this matter back in 2006 on a trip to Glacier Bay in Alaska. While there, we were handed a map showing the melting of the 65 mile long glacier which had occupied the bay when seafarers first charted the area back in 1750. Updates to the maps documented the melting of most of that glacier in the 1800’s, before the invention of the airplane and the mass production of the auto, and with population a fraction of what it is today. With that in mind, I am still waiting to hear how we are going to stop the warming today.

H.R.
Reply to  Peter Wells
November 9, 2021 6:51 am

Peter Wells: “With that in mind, I am still waiting to hear how we are going to stop the warming today.”



What I don’t get is why we’d even try to stop the warming. That’s nuckin’ futz!

a) A warmer world is a better world. Civilizations developed and flourished during the previous optimums and withered and disappeared during the cold periods.

ii) In the past, with CO2 at several thousand ppm, the Earth did not experience runaway Global Warming. The Earth was in fact quite lush.

3) During the Eemian interglacial, the estimates are that it was about 4(C) warmer than our current interglacial, and the oceans did not boil away.

Where’s the reason to try to stop “Global Warming”? There is none and the alternative, the return of a glaciation, is far worse.

Graemethecat
Reply to  H.R.
November 10, 2021 12:06 am

Greentards have no answer when confronted with these facts.

ATheoK
Reply to  Peter Wells
November 11, 2021 4:07 pm

I am still waiting to hear how we are going to stop the warming today.”

Before I can raise trees or grapevines that prosper in a warmer climate?

All of the years boosting modern temperatures and cooling the past are busted almost every winter when the lower bounds of our gardening hardiness zone are achieved and we are officially still a Zone 7.

Plants or crops that require Zone 8 temperatures are likely to fail. Maybe not immediately, but within a few years.

All of the alarmist nonsense has failed to actually temperatures in their slightest.
Find unadulterated temperatures for your local long term temperature sensor and chart the temperatures.

Skip the global anomaly nonsense.

Only, large towns and cities have rising temperatures and that is because of Urban Heat Index.

ATheoK
Reply to  M Courtney
November 11, 2021 3:56 pm

Only the media haven’t noticed that.”

Like most propagandists, they’re paid to not notice. Their jobs depend on lying to the public.

Coeur de Lion
November 9, 2021 12:10 am

In UK the opinion-formers will be a really appreciable hike in electricity prices coupled to blackouts.

richard
November 9, 2021 12:22 am

I doubt most people think about it at all and most of the time think about holidaying in some far off warm place, hopefully flying there in business class if they could afford it, driving a bigger car, eating at restaurants, buying the best clothes they can afftord, living in a swanky house…….

RickWill
Reply to  richard
November 9, 2021 1:13 am

I live in Melbourne Australia. I am on my second tank of fuel for the year. It was a joy to take the diesel powered car out on the highway and warm it up enough to get the particulate filter to induce a cleaning burn. That got rid of the anti-pollution alarm that has been up for 3 months that we were again confined to 5km of home. My diesel needs 40km at highway speed to induce the burn.

I am looking forward to having to fuel up before the end of the year despite fuel prices being higher.

I find it difficult to accept that 76% of people will be happy with more rules and regulations. After some 260 days in soft house arrest I am over more rules.

ozspeaksup
Reply to  RickWill
November 9, 2021 2:15 am

fuel isnt going down anytime soon;-)
rural prices here hit 1.67 a litre in the wimmera today

richard
Reply to  richard
November 9, 2021 1:34 am

and as for the Besos and colleagues all they do is think up better ways for the world to consume more goods whilst telling them not to.

“Don’t fly”

“Amazon Seeks Used Long-Range Cargo Jets Able to Fly From China”

Last edited 10 months ago by richard
Gregory Woods
Reply to  richard
November 9, 2021 1:49 am

No ‘besos’ for the unalarmed…

Bundy
November 9, 2021 12:23 am

This is encouraging as far as the general intelligence of the population goes. More healthy skepticism possibly than I thought.

If that’s the case then I guess the real problem is the noisy alarmist minority. As usual.

Richard Page
Reply to  Bundy
November 9, 2021 6:36 am

It should be a warning signal to that vocal minority to back off from the attack on meat eating (disguised as dealing with methane emissions), the push to net zero (and the corresponding drop in standard of living) including the banning of all ICE vehicles. However, my bet is that they’ll just try to up the ante or increase the rate of change. It’ll be a government train wreck by mismanagement.

Thomas Gasloli
November 9, 2021 12:39 am

As someone who worked in environmental protection for 40 years, in the US, the air is clean, the water is clean, and there is no such thing as “global warming” or “climate change”. The only environmental issue is the historic sites of contamination which have yet to be remediated.

Instead of wasting money subsidizing “renewables” in order to provide guaranteed profit to the politically connected wealthy, that money should be spent on site remediation.

RickWill
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
November 9, 2021 1:16 am

Fix real problems not the ones of faith. CO2 botherers need to be bothered in their own space using their own money. Leave the rest of us in peace.

spock
Reply to  Thomas Gasloli
November 9, 2021 11:34 pm

Please read these books, the two best books debunking climate change crap. Click the links to download a free copy. Please share with your family and friends.
(The website is like a Napster for books, almost every book ever published is available for free. No need to buy from Amazon anymore.)
The moral case for fossil fuels
http://library.lol/main/95AC3FC1E1D3768A2FF58A9556284B4E

Fake Invisible Catastrophes and Threats of Doom
http://library.lol/main/62F19352A7FD8FA7830C90D187094289

ian PRSY
November 9, 2021 1:07 am

The Guardian is a disciple of the green religion, so its readers could be expected to be in tune. If the survey had been done with Daily Mail or Daily Telegraph readers, would the results have been more sceptical? Probably, especially taking into account comments on articles tending towards climate alarmism.

Ed Zuiderwijk
November 9, 2021 1:36 am

60 percent tell that they can’t afford the luxury of being concerned about ‘climate change’. That is serious news for the ‘cause’ and for politicians as well. They may not have the money but many do have pitchforks.

griff
November 9, 2021 1:44 am

Well citizens in the surveyed nations are already doing a lot to fight climate change and roll out renewables – this is the civilised world, where we build new infrastructure, not the backward USA.

cerescokid
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 2:02 am

When they wear 6 layers of clothes inside their homes this winter because of the energy crisis how civil will that feel. What a bunch of naive doofuses.

SxyxS
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 2:27 am

Griff – being an a politically correct agenda idiot does not make you civilized.
And letting hordes of my uncivilized “brothers” into your country so that they rape and knife your children(while you don’t say a word and search for cheap excuses) won’t help either.

But at least you now show your real face of moral and intellectual supremacy. Such bold words against the USA while at the same time you would never dare to call one of the countries of my religion uncivilized(not without the approval of your masters) though they are miles behind in terms of civilization, makes you a hypocrit.

But let’s take a look into the most civilized regions in the USA = the most green and progressive state= California.
The black communities have been completely ruined as result of the systematic destruction of families.75% children out of wedlock.
70% + obesity rate even among young female grown ups as direct result of abuse as children without fathers are 5x more likely.
Abnormal high rates of STD’s.
Massive drug abuse.
Massive problems with extreme violence and homicide(90 % of trans and black victims are being killed by black people).
Abnormally high incarceration rate (which even doubled as result of the progressive Clinton-Biden criminal bill of 1995)
Most children of the inner city hoods can not read properly after leaving.

Overall civilisatory result of these policies.
Drugs and heroin needles all over the place.
Massive increase in homelessness,burglary,shop looting and violent crimes.
Forced vaccinations and lockdowns.
Empty stores.

All this happened as result of destructive policies disguised as benevolence and the absence of common sense.

You guys got throw everything away for the feeling of some moral high ground and intellectual supremacy and the chance to kiss some minority ass
and you are even begging for more..

Last edited 10 months ago by SxyxS
Chaswarnertoo
Reply to  Eric Worrall
November 9, 2021 9:57 am

My understanding is that griff is poor. On that basis his posts are baffling.

Climate believer
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 3:20 am

Oooo… look at Mr grumpy grumbles today… hasn’t had his Weetabix yet?

M Courtney
Reply to  Climate believer
November 9, 2021 6:02 am

Although that adds nothing but insults to the debate, you might like to know that the Weetabix factories are on strike at the moment.
https://www.theguardian.com/business/2021/nov/08/weetabix-workers-to-hold-four-day-strikes-over-pay-and-conditions

MarkW
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 6:59 am

Is there anything in griff’s comment that isn’t an insult towards those who don’t worship as it does?

Climate believer
Reply to  M Courtney
November 9, 2021 10:36 am

Debate?….with the Grifter?…. come on, you know very well that those drive by comments are not up for debate, I’ve tried, other’s have tried, there’s no response.

Grifter is a lifetime member of the wokey climate alarmism freak cult, too far gone I’m afraid.

MarkW
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 6:57 am

Could you come up with some documentation that this is what the citizens want, and not just the political class?
Also, could you provide some evidence that forcing the elderly to freeze to death is “civilized”?

Robert Hanson
Reply to  MarkW
November 9, 2021 3:07 pm

People have been shamed into touting the Party line about CC. That doesn’t mean they believe it, or care at all. The only meaningful polls are the ones that ask how much people are willing to pay out of their own pockets: 25% say $10 a month, 25% say $5 a month, and 50% say nothing at all. And that’s only what they tell a pollster. Just try to collect that $5/$10 and see how far you get with that.

Bryan A
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 7:54 am

Yep, forward thinking…using yesterday’s technology to empower societal changes tomorrow

Lrp
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 11:55 am

Offshoring your industries is not an effort, it’s stupid. And yet you still have to burn copious amounts of gas, diesel, and coal just to keep the lights on and barely stay warm at ever increasing costs. The sacrifices you make also make you miserable and envious, and now you demand the same of other people.

Robert Hanson
Reply to  griff
November 9, 2021 3:00 pm

Actually, the US is the only nation that has in fact lowered it’s production of Co2 over the last few years. Not because we really tried, but because fracking made Nat Gas so cheap it was easy to replace old coal power plants with new NG ones. The EU sings the Green song, and it’s Co2 output goes up. The US under Trump didn’t care at all, but the change to NG power plants produced actual results.

Pflashgordon
Reply to  griff
November 10, 2021 11:59 am

Griff, I will believe you are serious when San Francisco, Boston, London, etc. look like this.

CDB9D7EF-6F37-4CBB-9066-CA2077CE3535.jpeg
Pflashgordon
Reply to  Pflashgordon
November 10, 2021 12:00 pm

Or this

5616F9EA-78D9-4E0F-A91D-5FB95906B995.jpeg
Joseph Zorzin
November 9, 2021 2:07 am

“I think it will take more than a Guardian survey to tease out what is really happening…”

Beginning with a survey of the entire population, not just the Guardian’s readers.

Oldseadog
Reply to  Joseph Zorzin
November 9, 2021 2:21 am

To be fair, the poll was conducted by an outfit called Kantar Public, not The Guardian. The paper just published the results.

Climate believer
Reply to  Oldseadog
November 9, 2021 3:46 am

From their website:  “Combining computer science-based analytics with deep domain expertise, we generate rich insight from large and complex data sets.”

……no they don’t, their models are about as “insightful” as climate ones.

Sara
November 9, 2021 5:19 am

“…what happens to recycled trash,”

I do a certain amount of recycling with aluminum cans like cat food cans and soda cans. That gets me a small amount of cash I set aside for cat toys and fuzzy warm blankets for Miss Punkin Squawkypants, who can be quite demanding about such things. A while ago, the county made use of recycled plastics by using the product – a plastic bead – as ground cover at playgrounds.

Is it worth it? Yeah, it’s cash back for a reusable item, so why not? I know the local garbage pickup people run their trucks on natgas and also do recycling because they can get cash out of it. Paper is bundled into bales and recycled for future use,and if you get those sticky notepads at an office supply store, it’s likely they are made from recycled paper products. Electronics like your cell phone have metals that can be recovered. I think that Apple recovered something like a real ton of gold just by recalling old phones and computers and dismantling the boards and putting them through a chemical recovery solution.

Yes, a lot does go into landfill, but a great portion of that is organic material that can and does decay into a form of natural gas than can be “mined”, refined and put to use. There’s a garbage “dump” southwest of me that is mined for gas.

That’s what goes on around here. Don’t know about other places,

Richard Page
Reply to  Sara
November 9, 2021 6:43 am

See, I like those ways of doing things – it means that, by recycling, we can prolong ‘peak…..’ by quite a margin. Recycling shouldn’t be some kind of virtue signalling that people feel they must do, it should help us move forward.

MarkW
Reply to  Sara
November 9, 2021 7:02 am

Very little household paper gets recycled, too much of it is contaminated with food products and other things.
Aluminum is about the only thing that’s “recycled” from households that doesn’t end up in the dump.

H.R.
Reply to  MarkW
November 9, 2021 9:18 am

I thought much the same, Mark. My son was dumping glass bottles and jars in our recycle bin and I thought the waste company said they didn’t want glass.

So I called and they said they do recycle the glass, any color. It’s sorted out and sent to a place nearby that turns the glass into some sort of pebbles that are mixed in with paving material. I can’t recall if it was cement, blacktop (Oh no! That’s r-a-a-a-a-c-i-s-t!) or both.

No need to remove the labels, either. Somewhere in the process the labels are burned off(?) or washed away(?). I can’t recall all of the phone conversation, but our waste disposal company takes glass.

They also recycle paper. They want only clean paper, and cardboard, though. No greasy pizza boxes.

All that said, you’re right about not much actually being recycled because only certain waste companies are set up to get the most out of recycle bins. Ours is set up pretty well for that. The rest just go for the steel and aluminum and bury the rest, and most don’t even bother with that; no sorting process so tip it all into a landfill.

ATheoK
Reply to  H.R.
November 11, 2021 4:45 pm

Our local County recycling say the same sorts of things…

Except their storage sheds show a completely different picture.
They accumulate recycling and suddenly are emptied.

It’s a store and forward center. No sortation beyond the separation required for collection.

Ask the questions differently and one gets different answers.

They don’t want greasy pizza boxes because too many raise the price to forward the paper.
Apparently whomever buys our recycling has at various times refused to accept piles of dirty paper.

That stored dirty paper goes to the general dump, so the shed can accept next week’s collection.

Our county did buy those plastic beads for the playgrounds. Beads that were not made from our collected plastic.

No glass manufacturer making glass beads for roads nearby.

Recycled paper products… If one checks into how used paper is recycled, one learns that high quality cotton paper is worth the most. Stuff that isn’t found in county recycling sumps.

Check a little further and one learns that paper can only be recycled so many times before it is unusable as writing/print paper.

Guess what quality goes into pizza boxes.

meab
Reply to  Sara
November 9, 2021 8:35 am

The numbers vary from study to study (a lot) but only about 33% (plus or minus) of all discarded plastic in the U.S. actually gets recycled. This article does a good job explaining why it’s so low. Again, the numbers vary according to who is making them up, but this article claims that only about 8.4% of all trash is recycled.

https://www.livescience.com/how-much-plastic-recycling.html

They say “Dogs have owners, cats have staff”.

michel
November 9, 2021 5:22 am

What a question. Preserve the planet?

Matthew Sykes
November 9, 2021 5:26 am

“preserve thep lanet” is not the same as “climate change”. For a start it is a general question, that covers many issues, plastics, CO2, etc. Not just CO2.

If the question was “is there a climate crisis” the response would have been about 5% yes.

This isnt a survey, it is BS, loaded words, and the results junk.

Very few people buy the climate crisis BS, very very few.

DocSiders
November 9, 2021 5:35 am

As usual…the Grundian framed their report incorrectly.

The “people” aren’t unwilling to SAVE THE PLANET.

The people are unwilling to pay anything for NOTHING…since your last 280 chicken little warnings were just chicken little propaganda.

The “People” no longer believe anything you tell them. AND the Climate doesn’t seem to be a problem AT ALL in their lives.

Now all we have to do is get Election Results to reflect the actual vote of eligible voters.

John the Econ
November 9, 2021 5:44 am

Or it might just be greed. They believe in the crisis, but under modern Progressivism, it’s always up to someone else to make the real sacrifices and to pay for them.

Alasdair Fairbairn
November 9, 2021 6:06 am

All these surveys do is to indicate the success or failure of the ongoing relentless political propaganda cluttering up the air waves.
Sadly it shows how remarkably successful “Big Brother”(aka: The UN and it’s acolytes such as the IPCC) has been.
Bending your knee to “Big Brother” is very dangerous.

Olen
November 9, 2021 6:07 am

The green new deal is OK for those self absorbed individuals who have time to contemplate their navel waiting for electricity blackouts and taking time to recharge their electric cars but for most that is not acceptable. Most have neither the time or patience to afford the luxury of inconvenience.

At least the Guardian admitted people are not willing to see their way of life destroyed to save the planet. That would be not believing the greens have the power to change the weather.

ResourceGuy
November 9, 2021 6:11 am

Channeling much?

Nicholas McGinley
November 9, 2021 6:22 am

They ask loaded questions and then overinterpret the responses.
To a large degree, when people respond to surveys, they go where the questions lead them, and also tend to give the answers they think the questioner wants them to give.
Also who responds and who does not has a huge effect on results.

It has been shown that if you ask people a series of questions and record the answers, if you then read them a little story, and ask the same questions again, the response will shift depending on what story you have told.

All of this makes the results of any such loaded surveys next to worthless: The surveyor is almost sure to get the answers they want to get.
When one additionally notes how the responses are interpreted in highly questionable ways, all one can really take away from such a report, is what the people responsible for creating it want you to think.

Other surveys have shown almost everyone says they are willing to make changes, but when asked how much they will personally take out of their own pocket for such changes to be implemented, the result is telling: On average, people are willing to spend about a dollar for such hypothetical imperatives as “tackling climate change.”

People know the difference between idle chitchat and money being lifted out of their bank account.

John Bell
November 9, 2021 6:26 am

I know liberals who live jet setting life styles, but who think they are living green, hilarious, they are so in denial. Liberals…I used to think I was one of them, when I was young and naive, but know much better now.

PaulH
November 9, 2021 7:09 am

I don’t have the headspace to think about it

That sounds like a what a tall person would say when told they must buy a sub-sub-compact car. 😉

Michael Nagy
November 9, 2021 8:33 am

I run into this all the time with people who are afraid that the climate will be ruined. They won’t give up their car, sell their washing machine and disconnect from the grid. Greta is the big one since her voice is so loud. Let them use an outhouse, fetch water from a nearby creek, and walk to the bus stop for a while and they will change their tune. By the way this always wins the argument.

Joao Martins
November 9, 2021 8:56 am

Please, take note and do not disregard those 72% !!!

72% ! It is a great proportion!

72% of those inquired by the G. “don’t think there is an agreement among experts on the best solutions to preserve the planet”!

Just disregard the easy superficial (suggested by the paper) admission that there is a “problem” to which “solutions” are being searched; and the suggestion that the planet must be “preserved” (from what?). Both are suggestions induced by the paper in the formulation of the questions.

And then, think that there must be a large correspondence between a lot of those 72% and another lot of the 76% that generously would sacrifice for the good of all. We are forced to conclude that (1) most respondents to the silly survey are generous people BUT (2) that they think there is not enough knowledge to take action.

This is just the opposite that the G. wants us to see in the results of the silly survey.

Last edited 10 months ago by Joao Martins
Joe Gordon
November 9, 2021 9:36 am

The response pattern seems similar to another question one could ask.

“How do we determine the ‘fair’ percentage of income tax people should pay?”

A. A flat 20% tax on all income above a standard deduction.
B. A progressive system similar to the current US tax code.
C. A progressive system, but eliminate the loopholes Congress carved out for themselves and their benefactors.
D. 50% of all income, no exceptions.
E. 0% of all income up to the amount I make, 100% of everything over that.

A lot of people are happily noisy until it starts to affect them. They would never admit their choice of E.

Andy Pattullo
November 9, 2021 10:04 am

Once more, the public are smarter than the pundits. The emperor may be able to coerce the dependents into marvelling at his brilliant attire, and the commercial media are willing to say anything that sells advertising, but the taxpayers only see a hairy butt and questionable intellect.

Jasonn
November 9, 2021 5:34 pm

Blatant globalist hoax to push a one world agenda. Eff em.

observa
November 9, 2021 7:14 pm

Citizens are alarmed by the climate crisis, but most believe they are already doing more to preserve the planet than anyone else, including their government,

That’s because they know BIG GREEN is on the job with their taxes-
Electric vehicle factory plan collapses and with it the promise of 500 Victorian jobs (msn.com)

With Toyota Ford and GM finally pulling out of car manufacturing in Oz because taxpayer subsidy couldn’t possibly keep them going with small runs and our costs you knew full well local EV manufacturing was utter fantasy.

“The government has refused to say how much money had been paid to the company or whether any had been repaid, saying the matter was commercial in confidence.”

Basically thanks for the taxpayer largesse Dan and happy to help out with the media show and don’t hesitate to call on us again in your hour of need.

spock
November 9, 2021 11:27 pm

Im doing my part by farting less, gives me cramps but if it will save at least one polar bear…

%d bloggers like this: