Mark Bannister

Low carbon birding, sound recording: Barton claypits & other places; printmaker; Green Party and land access rights activist; anti-facist

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@bjames280961 @fionaharvey @GerardAMorrow None that you’ve read and understood you mean. I once worked in Tesco’s butchers so can offer you open heart surgery if you ever need it. I mean, who needs experts?

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@bjames280961 @fionaharvey @GerardAMorrow Lots of causation and proofs available from the scientific experts if you can be bothered to find it. We don’t need to be experts ourselves, all we need to do is to be able to distinguish between peer-reviewed science produced by experts and the rest, including ‘modest’ Gerry.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@fionaharvey @englishfil @georgebernhard If I’m being charitable, perhaps some are only unconsciously being so. Maybe. Whatever the case, laying it out with data like you do is well worthwhile. Excellent work.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@englishfil @fionaharvey @georgebernhard Perhaps not if, in your SUV, you hit another SUV in a head-on collision. Far more kinetic energy to dissipate (also physics). Assuming we are not completely selfish, we should also think about pedestrians and cyclists, including children, yes?

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@FillmoreWhite It’s a bit like saying SUVs have better navigation, driving aids, internet connectivity - they are all completely independent of size. What certainly is dependent on vehicle size is pedestrian safety.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@FillmoreWhite You are getting confused with advances in engine technology. A bigger car has more mass and frontal area. More mass means more fuel to accelerate and increased tyre rolling resistance. Once at speed, more frontal area means more aerodynamic drag, meaning more fuel burn. Physics.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@lucasbergkamp @fionaharvey Are trying to tell me that the reductions in CO2 emissions resulting from the roll-out of renewables, efficiency gains etc existing today are not real?

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@MiltonicMindset @fionaharvey @TobyJoyce14 @LizWebsterSBF With respect, Joseph, you appear unable to follow simple logic, or perhaps you are just pretending not to.

Either:
100 lots of 1% co2 reduction is 100% co2 reduction

It’s really not difficult to understand.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@MiltonicMindset @fionaharvey @TobyJoyce14 @LizWebsterSBF Ah, I see. So after all that you are just a climate change denier. We could have got there a lot earlier if you had just said that at the beginning. Of course with your brilliant mind you are completely correct and 99.9% of actual climate scientists are wrong Joseph.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@NathanielHart72 @fionaharvey @charlesarthur So easy to understand that I can only assume you are pretending not to.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@NathanielHart72 @fionaharvey @charlesarthur It’s not hard to understand. You said “My country could sink into the North Sea today, and it would have 0 impact on climate change”. This is completely independent of the cost of anything. Telling people in the Netherlands, or any other small country to use the same argument.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@NathanielHart72 @fionaharvey @charlesarthur It is infantile levels of logic.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@NathanielHart72 @fionaharvey @charlesarthur Which is a separate argument to “Netherlands emissions reductions has no effect on climate”, so don’t mix up the two. There is an ongoing repetition on X of people that “their countries emissions are so small at c1%, it will make no difference, why should we bother?”

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@NathanielHart72 @fionaharvey @charlesarthur We have the necessary clean energy technologies now and some costs are reducing as they are rolled out at scale - eg battery storage. “Just keep researching” and “instead, spend on adaptation” is a fossil fuel company trope. Not very hip.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@NathanielHart72 @fionaharvey @charlesarthur You said: “I'm saying that the decline in the Netherlands has no effect.” You didn’t mention cost. It’s easy to add some whataboutery. The fact is the argument that “our emissions are tiny compared to the whole so why bother” is bereft of logic. Cost is different argument.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@MiltonicMindset @fionaharvey @TobyJoyce14 @LizWebsterSBF One error I made: it was 500billion trees to give c200Gt of CO2 absorption over c100years, not 1billion trees.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@MiltonicMindset @fionaharvey @TobyJoyce14 @LizWebsterSBF Here’s one that shows, at best, over a period of 100years of tree growth for 1billion new trees, they may absorb c200GT CO2 emissions, so, on average, will absorb c2GT per year. Compare with c38GT per year of current human emissions. There is a big gap. https://t.co/glSEySCXSk

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@MiltonicMindset @fionaharvey @TobyJoyce14 @LizWebsterSBF It’s not a difficult concept Joseph. I strongly suspect most of your students could follow the logic, but for some reason, you refuse to do so.

[Mark Bannister @mark_banni]

@MiltonicMindset @fionaharvey @TobyJoyce14 @LizWebsterSBF You appear to agree that everyone should pick up litter and dog shit even though individual action would be tiny compared to the whole, but for some reason it appears you cannot apply the same logic to carbon emissions arguing “we are only 1%”. You were almost there at one point.