Please read "Fill it up".

[nonoLeRobot]

As I had already noticed that somewhere, a German emits 9,8 tonnes of CO2 / year a French 6,2 ( wikipedia)

Even if nuclear power can explain a small part of it, they emit much more CO2. So of course it would be great to do smart things like you mentioned, but it is clear that it is apparently prettier than really effective. If we start over, I will have to find my post (I will re-edit later if I find it). Here, it must remain Janco's book. For taxes, he must have a suitable post also I imagine.

[Woodcutter]

[...] A little anecdote: I live near the German border, I went there to do some shopping and I just saw that the disposable tray in which there were the sausages is stamped: "biodegradable - Kompostierbar" . So I could put it on my compost. What has one already seen that in France? me no. It just goes to show that we can move in the right direction, with an ecological conscience unrelated to fuel costs.

Me yes ... On certain organic products that I buy.

But in practice an ecological conscience would suffice,

In practice, who has this ecological conscience?
You cannot deny that the influence of the German "Greens" is much higher than a France, not to mention the difference in mentality which makes them perhaps, overall, more concerned about their neighbor than the "Latins. "...


Your example on manure is interesting, but above all it illustrates the fact that certain "social groups" are more advanced than others in environmental considerations.

"Ecological awareness" is a long-term job, it is not necessary ... An incentive tax, yes!
This does not mean that the solution to taxation excludes any other means of influencing energy-consuming behavior.

For Nono, the difference in CO2 emissions must be made, at least, on two levels: the car fleet and power plants.

[bham]

but it is clear that it is apparently prettier than really effective.

Ah well, I'm surprised, we can review that indeed, but my goal was to illustrate what we can do with an ecological conscience.

In practice, who has this ecological conscience?

the State could have it, if it is not the citizens but I still think that many French non-targeted green would find very well this kind of initiatives, as also the methanisation of household waste.

You cannot deny that the influence of the German "Greens" is much higher than a France, not to mention the difference in mentality that makes them perhaps, overall, more concerned about their neighbor than the "Latins. "...?.

Yes it is true, but in this regard the Germans would be rather more selfish than the French, on the other hand they are more attentive to their lifestyle, to the quality of what they eat. For example, Haribo candies do not have the same composition in Germany and in France. With us, we collapse under the E112, .....

"Ecological awareness" is a long-term job, it is not necessary ... An incentive tax, yes!
This does not mean that the solution to taxation excludes any other means of influencing energy-consuming behavior.

Between a State which imposes taxes on you and another which imposes an ecological conscience on you through initiatives, do you choose the first one?
And then I am convinced that a large majority of French people would approve collective initiatives of this style. And at least there we have something concrete. And for the examples, we can always look at what is done in the countries of the North.
As for energy-consuming behavior, do you think that a majority of French people are not attentive to the energy they consume? I don't think so.

[Rulian]

It's nice, Bham, your community initiatives (besides the recovery of agricultural manure is practiced more and more in France, but poses a lot of organizational problems of waste management in certain places ...), it's on that the French would approve ... especially since the effort does not come from them.

If you want to change the behavior of the population in the short term (and we agree that it is the one and only credible solution), you have two solutions: convince them or type in your wallet. Convincing doesn't work. It therefore remains to hurt the wallet via a tax. Tax that would finance more alternatives and community initiatives. I send you back to the book once again ... (we're going to get you to read it )

There is no other way, and as unfortunate as they are, they must be implemented under penalty of running to disaster.

[bioman14]

but no !! should not read this book to find answers to ALL bahm's objections, despite that they are there.
it should be read because it is often very funny.

a+

[bham]

It's nice, Bham, your community initiatives (besides the recovery of agricultural manure is practiced more and more in France, but poses a lot of organizational problems of waste management in certain places ...), it's on that the French would approve ... especially since the effort does not come from them.

If you want to change the behavior of the population in the short term (and we agree that it is the one and only credible solution), you have two solutions: convince them or type in your wallet. Convincing doesn't work. It therefore remains to hurt the wallet via a tax. Tax that would finance more alternatives and community initiatives. I send you back to the book once again ... (we're going to get you to read it )

There is no other way, and as unfortunate as they are, they must be implemented under penalty of running to disaster.

I think we're going in circles. You are anyway for the "good" old French method which consists in putting a tax on the tax (we are all the same the inventors of the VAT!) Starting from the assumption that everyone is mean and sees only his little personal comfort. Me, I call it putting the cart before the horse. But it is true that we are "balaise" for that in France.
While our neighbors are quietly advancing on the path of ecology, through various initiatives, we criticize, we butt, we gauge, we say that it does not upset the world and that ultimately there is nothing like a good old tax to move mentalities. We do not know what it will generate, but at least there will be money in the boxes: that is super prospective! hat! As if collecting money suddenly (and yes, of course!) Gives us the keys to clean energy.
Regarding the book, well no, I don't want to spend money to read it. I have other interesting things to read.

[Christine]

You know Christine, politics is not a long quiet river

You know, it is not because I am a young woman that I necessarily see life in pink, naively and without tools to make an opinion.

Did you know that today in France people have trouble paying their fuel, just to be able to heat themselves?

Do you think I live on another planet, blindfolded and blocked ears? But the problems of material misery (also intellectual or emotional) must be solved by choices of society which does not concern only energy. We must act on the causes of this misery, not on its consequences.

Anyway, not everything is as rosy as saying: let's increase the price of fuels and something will happen that will make things change.

This is not what we say. Of course we must accompany this increase in constructive proposals. But this increase is an essential step for constructive proposals to be effective.

There is nothing like a good old tax to move mentalities. We don't know what it will generate, but at least there will be money in the boxes

Will there be money to finance better insulated housing for those who do not know how to heat themselves? or for other initiatives in the field of renewable energies? It is better to have projects with full cases to finance them than to launch haphazard ideas.

Our charming Christine said:

Quote:
And yet, when someone makes proposals, we balk because it may disturb some personal comforts


I think it goes beyond "personal comforts": there is industry, lobbying and all that.

Thank you for noticing that I am charming but I did not say that there is no lobbying. My remark concerned those who constantly call for a strong political will in matters of the environment and who, when a suggestion presents itself whose common sense is unanimous, have a reaction (epidermic) of rejection because it implies an effort of their go. I admit my helplessness to understand what they want. Give them an effortless turnkey solution? May a dictatorship impose their lives on them so that they no longer have any responsibilities? A magic wand? ... in any case, it is not I who live in fairyland.

Here, this to answer the remarks which were made to me personally. For the rest, I am entirely on the same wavelength as Bucheron and Nono and I could not better argue that they did.

[iota]

Hi everybody,

I just read the subject diagonally and it gives me the impression that there is no solution or rather that everyone has a different one and adapted to his case and his possibilities.

Regarding the current "struggle" to limit the use of petroleum, it looks like a guy who would have lung cancer and who would continue to smoke, but only light ... and who would go and live in the countryside because the air is pure and that makes revise his air conditioning filter in his car.

I am sure there are solutions and they can be applied now.
Let me explain:
How many of us work 40 or 50 km from home, do the same job as another and that this other works in our area.
It would be wiser to change the job, right ?!
So everyone would already have a job near their home and it would avoid huge trips.
I have as proof my own experience as an electronics technician who will work in a box with 50 terminals while a friend with the same diploma bump near my home and is paid the same ... sorry but it cuts me off !

Is car sharing encouraged? what a slab!
It costs nothing at all, I did it precisely during this period of long journeys and in addition we bother less.

After having consumed thousands of liters of fuel I took the time to decide to take the train, except that it was in the Paris suburbs, I put twice as much time and wandered around with a tear gas canister and full dark circles the eyes.

Since I live in the countryside, I don't have a job yet and there is no danger that I will make "efforts" to reduce my consumption of anything since I hardly use my car, we are wearing a sweater all day long, we heat ourselves with gas (economical at the time it was installed) and we eat what the garden gives us.

If ever taxes or the price of fuel or gas increases, I die !!!!!!!!!!!!!
I cannot afford to change the way I warm myself (apart from putting on a sweater again) or the means to buy a toyota prius.

I am sure that solutions exist, that the manufacturers have everything they need in their drawer and that they are waiting for the last moment to get their gadgets out and shine in the face of the world.
It's always when you have both feet in the m ... that we bizarrely find solutions (catalytic converter, hybrid engine, wind turbines, ...).
As if by chance it is total that takes care of bio fuels, you have to have more than one string to its bow.

I also wonder if there is not a little pipo there, we manufacture airbuses, giant liners and all the big countries do about the same.
These industrialists know better than us the relationship that our civilization has with regard to petroleum, so I wonder if they build to throw everything away in 10 years or if they know that it is pipo and that airbus and company have bright days ahead of them ... I don't know if I made myself clear ...

[nonoLeRobot]

Well I guess you have not read the book either iota, so good same things as before. For your stubbornness not to read the book, know that an argument is not good or bad depending on whether the conclusion pleases or not.

For the history of work, it's very interesting, and it's a real problem.
I wonder what would encourage us to limit travel ;-)

Similar research when there are always confs at the other end of the world, not always essential.
I wonder what would encourage us to limit travel ;-)

So that the industrialists decide to take out what they have in the boxes (I doubt there is much much crisp) but above all
I wonder what would encourage you to get out of economic stuff ;-)

For the problem of too expensive living in a detached house with garden in the countryside is a "luxury" that not everyone will be able to access.

For the rest, I am entirely on the same wavelength as Bucheron and Nono

It is not to make the fayot but it is not surprising I think I have always agreed with all your posts, especially when you put Christophe in his place in my place;)

[Woodcutter]

[...]

In practice, who has this ecological conscience?

the State could have it, if it is not the citizens but I still think that many French non-targeted green would find very well this kind of initiatives, as also the methanisation of household waste.

"The state" could possibly have it if we, the people who vote, elect people who are ready to sacrifice a political career to put in place measures which, at first glance, are perceived as binding ...
It must be admitted that this is not the case ...

"Ecological awareness" is a long-term job, it is not necessary ... An incentive tax, yes!
This does not mean that the solution to taxation excludes any other means of influencing energy-consuming behavior.

Between a State which imposes taxes on you and another which imposes an ecological conscience on you through initiatives, do you choose the first one?

I'm repeating myself, but I don't see how we could "impose" an ecological conscience ... There is a contradiction!
Consciousness comes from within, from education ... I repeat (again ... I feel like I'm only doing this on this post ... ) education, the opening of everyone to an ecological awareness is a long-term job and believe me, it is VERY VERY FAR to be won ... (example later if necessary)
It turns out that we don't have time because it would probably take more than a generation to obtain tangible results and, apparently, we still have ten years to try to reverse the trend ... After it's the wall, whatever we do ...

And then I am convinced that a large majority of French people would approve collective initiatives of this style. And at least there we have something concrete. And for the examples, we can always look at what is done in the countries of the North.

Really? So why are not all the behaviors that make it possible to waste less (source of energy consumption) adopted by all?

As for energy-consuming behavior, do you think that a majority of French people are not attentive to the energy they consume? I don't think so.

Yes, I think a majority of people don't care, WHEN IT DOES NOT COST TOO MUCH EXPENSIVE!
Ask people their motivation to consume less energy (fuel or other) and invariably the majority response will be: spend less money!