#schoolstrike4climate

Greyhounded into submission by striking school kids

When will Australian authorities realize that allowing the intimidation of corporates who are running legitimate businesses must stop? If we allow activists to bully companies into bending to a socialist ideology, will we be the least bit surprised when foreign investment dries up in the future? Because that will be the outcome.

It isn’t enough that activist environmental departments wrap businesses up in so much red tape in order to get approvals. We have to tolerate a small band of student protestors too.

Bus company, Greyhound Australia (GA), is the latest company to fold to activist pressure. It has rejected a contract to ferry workers to construct the Adani mine after being all for it.

SchoolStrike4Climate launched a campaign to boycott travel with GA until it publicly ruled out working on the mine. So now we have brainwashed teenagers dictating school transport policy even though they don’t pay a cent to fund it.

We’re somewhat surprised these kids aren’t dictating the school curriculum while they’re at it. Seriously, where are the schools in their quest to teach discipline? We already saw what happened to Newington College which proudly wilted to student pressure. Note it’s 2019 HSC rank fell from 98th to 176th. No connection, surely?

What our continued PISA education ranking slump tells us is that the teaching faculties have a lot to answer for to surrender to this garbage. It only suggests they’re willing accomplices rather than disciplinarians.

It is bad enough when adults push agendas. It is worse when they manipulate children to do their bidding for them.

Going back to GA, Had these children and teachers done their homework they would have realized that this wasn’t the first time the company has had ties with fossil fuel companies. Had their laser quick smartphone skills led them to the history page of Greyhound Australia they would have learned that,

in conjunction with the Shell Company, undertook a survey of the route from Adelaide to Perth – a distance of over 3,200 Kilometres – in 1957.

How could they have let this company transport them in the first place?!? It should have never been on the list. Common sense would prevail that the school only opened the yellow pages to hire a bus charter company. At no stage did the school demand a full audit on corporate carbon footprints.

Had it occurred to these kids that these buses that ferry them on school excursions run on diesel? While the per passenger carbon footprint might be smaller than alternative modes of transport, these kids should demand that the schools ban them outright, or doesn’t that count when they are having fun? Maybe the lesson should be that they don’t get to go on excursions to save the planet and will now have to walk or cycle to school instead of hitching a ride in mum’s SUV.

Although GA does list a pretty pithy section on lowering emissions

Limit the size of your luggage by packing only what you need – the more a bus or plane weighs, the more carbon emissions it produces. Enjoy local food and drink which haven’t been imported from far away – not only will you help the environment, you’ll also experience new flavours (and maybe find a new favourite). And finally, avoid plastic bags and bottled water – take your own reusable shopping bags to the local farmers markets, and refill your bottles throughout the day. Every little bit helps!

Had GA truly believed in this garbage, they would have never bothered to entertain the Adani contract in the first place.

Looking forward to seeing the private bus company that steps up to fill the void for Adani. Surely the same Queenslanders that voted for Adani’s go ahead in the last federal election will back GA’s replacement to transport workers, many of whom probably have kids at school.

School Climate Strikers demand McDonalds

Good to see that kids are still kids. Before demanding we selfish adults take climate action immediately, they obviously need to fuel up on McDonalds, a brand that represents the complete anti Christ of their cause. Dipping nuggets into plastic BBQ sauce bowls, eating from cardboard hamburger boxes and drinking from single use waxed paper cups and plastic straws all stuck in a disposable paper bag.

Tells us all we need to know. The saddest thing is these kids are blissfully unaware of their own hypocrisy.

It is more likely that a McDonalds diet will kill them way before Mother Nature does.

Have the old ruined the planet for the youth as they prepare for the school climate strike tomorrow?

Image may contain: 1 person

As the school climate strikes are prepared for tomorrow, it is worth reflecting on the recklessness of the older generations…or not…

At the store check out, the young cashier suggested to the much older lady that she should bring her own grocery bags because plastic bags are not good for the environment.

The woman apologized to the young girl and explained, “We didn’t have this ‘green thing’ back in my earlier days.”

The young clerk responded, “That’s our problem today. Your generation did not care enough to save our environment for future generations.”

The older lady said that she was right our generation didn’t have the “green thing” in its day. The older lady went on to explain: Back then, we returned milk bottles, soda bottles and beer bottles to the store. The store sent them back to the plant to be washed and sterilized and refilled, so it could use the same bottles over and over. So they really were recycled.

But we didn’t have the “green thing” back in our day. Grocery stores bagged our groceries in brown paper bags that we reused for numerous things. Most memorable besides household garbage bags was the use of brown paper bags as book covers for our school books. This was to ensure that public property (the books provided for our use by the school) was not defaced by our scribblings. Then we were able to personalize our books on the brown paper bags.

But, too bad we didn’t do the “green thing” back then. We walked up stairs because we didn’t have an escalator in every store and office building. We walked to the grocery store and didn’t climb into a 300-horsepower machine every time we had to go two blocks. But she was right. We didn’t have the “green thing” in our day.

Back then we washed the baby’s diapers because we didn’t have the throw-away kind. We dried clothes on a line, not in an energy-gobbling machine burning up 220 volts. Wind and solar power really did dry our clothes back in our early days.

Kids got hand-me-down clothes from their brothers or sisters, not always brand-new clothing. But that young lady is right; we didn’t have the “green thing” back in our day.
Back then we had one TV, or radio, in the house — not a TV in every room. And the TV had a small screen the size of a handkerchief (remember them?), not a screen the size of the state of Montana.

In the kitchen, we blended and stirred by hand because we didn’t have electric machines to do everything for us.

When we packaged a fragile item to send in the mail, we used wadded up old newspapers to cushion it, not Styrofoam or plastic bubble wrap.

Back then, we didn’t fire up an engine and burn gasoline just to cut the lawn. We used a push mower that ran on human power.

We exercised by working so we didn’t need to go to a health club to run on treadmills that operate on electricity. But she’s right; we didn’t have the “green thing” back then.

We drank from a fountain when we were thirsty instead of using a cup or a plastic bottle every time we had a drink of water. We refilled writing pens with ink instead of buying a new pen, and we replaced the razor blade in a razor instead of throwing away the whole razor just because the blade got dull. But we didn’t have the “green thing” back then.
Back then, people took the streetcar or a bus and kids rode their bikes to school or walked instead of turning their moms into a 24-hour taxi service in the family’s $45,000 SUV or van, which cost what a whole house did before the “green thing.”

We had one electrical outlet in a room, not an entire bank of sockets to power a dozen appliances. And we didn’t need a computerized gadget to receive a signal beamed from satellites 23,000 miles out in space in order to find the nearest burger joint.
But isn’t it sad the current generation laments how wasteful we old folks were just because we didn’t have the “green thing” back then?

Please forward this on to another selfish old person who needs a lesson in conservation from a smart ass young person. We don’t like being old in the first place, so it doesn’t take much to piss us off… Especially from a tattooed, multiple pierced smartass who can’t make change without the cash register telling them how much.

Something kids will fear way more than climate change

Image result for teenagers smartphones selfies climate strike

Is there one thing greater than climate change that can cause children irreparable harm? Yes. Perhaps the kids attending the school climate strikes tomorrow ought to consider that the very smartphone devices that they can’t put down are also harmful to the environment. Will these kids happily give up their smartphones in a quest to save the planet? Will these kids be willing to give up Snapchat, Instagram, Facebook and Twitter to save their own lives? Not in a million years.

An abstract of a report on the impact of technological devices on GHG emissions by Belkhir & Elmeligi, titled, ‘Assessing ICT global emissions footprint: Trends to 2040 & recommendations is as follows,

In light of the concerted efforts to reduce global greenhouse gas emissions (GHGE) per the so-called Paris Agreement, the Information and Communication Industry (ICT) has received little attention as a significant contributor to GHGE and if anything is often highly praised for enabling efficiencies that help reduce other industry sectors footprint. In this paper, we aim at assessing the global carbon footprint of the overall ICT industry, including the contribution from the main consumer devices, the data centers and communication networks, and compare it with the to the total worldwide GHGE. We conduct a detailed and rigorous analysis of the ICT global carbon footprint, including both the production and the operational energy of ICT devices, as well as the operational energy for the supporting ICT infrastructure. We then compare this contribution to the global 2016-level GHGE. We have found that, if unchecked, ICT GHGE relative contribution could grow from roughly 1–1.6% in 2007 to exceed 14% of the 2016-level worldwide GHGE by 2040, accounting for more than half of the current relative contribution of the whole transportation sector. Our study also highlights the contribution of smartphones and shows that by 2020, the footprint of smartphones alone would surpass the individual contribution of desktops, laptops and displays. Finally, we offer some actionable recommendations on how to mitigate and curb the ICT explosive GHGE footprint, through a combination of renewable energy use, tax policies, managerial actions and alternative business models.”

The study found that the relative emissions share of smartphones is expected to grow to 11% by 2020, exceeding the individual contributions of PCs, laptops and computer displays.

In absolute values, emissions caused by smartphones will jump from 17Mt to 125Mt of CO2 equivalent per year (Mt-CO2e/yr) in that time span or +730%. Most of this occurs at the production stage. Nevertheless with mobile carriers encouraging shorter cycles to upgrade this will only get worse.

ICT will grow from 215Mt-CO2e/yr in 2007 to 764 MtCO2-e/yr by 2020, with data centres (storing all those photos) accounting for about two-thirds of the total contribution.

For comparison purposes, the entire carbon footprint of Australia was about 550 MtCO2-e in 2018.

CM guesses these kids ought to be walking to school too. It is a great lesson in what real sacrifice means. At least they got the day off school.