Home  5  Books  5  GBEzine  5  News  5  HelpDesk  5  Register  5  GreenBuilding.co.uk
Not signed in (Sign In)


Green Building Bible, Fourth Edition
Green Building Bible, fourth edition (both books)
These two books are the perfect starting place to help you get to grips with one of the most vitally important aspects of our society - our homes and living environment.

PLEASE NOTE: A download link for Volume 1 will be sent to you by email and Volume 2 will be sent to you by post as a book.

Buy individually or both books together. Delivery is free!

powered by Surfing Waves

Vanilla 1.0.3 is a product of Lussumo. More Information: Documentation, Community Support.

Welcome to new Forum Visitors
Join the forum now and benefit from discussions with thousands of other green building fans and discounts on Green Building Press publications: Apply now.

    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2018
    It's no good bullying - and prob no good appealing to facts and reason either! What to do?!
    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2018
    No intent on my part to bully.

    I am genuinely angry that someone intelligent would dig their heels as a matter of personal *taste* to avoid him (and others) dealing with something which is *already* killing and injuring others, with a high level of scientific confidence. And the risks are likely existential, but conveniently beyond his likely lifetime.

    Which is a statistically common feature amongst such people, it seems.

    Thus my outrage.


    • CommentAuthortony
    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2018
    OK then what do you do?

    I pick up litter outside my house and my neighbours houses

    I help install community funded solar panels for local organisations

    I write letters to my local authority, help test air quality and look at air quality monitoring results. I campaign against our LA’s policy of monitoring only and whose action plan is to have an action plan air quality is a huge problem compounded by WBS, and it is causing a huge number of early deaths.

    I live in house without formal heating, drive an electric car, have solar panels on my roof, help those living in energy poverty to be warmer by helping them draughtproofing their homes.

    The hole in the ozone layer has probably always been there and certainly will always be there as it is a function of the planet being a sphere and sunlight not being able to form ozone at the poles as the atmospheric light path is too long there for the ozone to be formed.

    Over fishing is a serious problem and is unrelated to AGW as are several of these subject areas, deforestation and loss of fertility of soils both worry me.

    I work hard to encourage energy use reduction, work voluntarily on renewable energy projects, wasting resources does matter but not because of CC but because we should not waste or over use them ‘per say’.

    I do not have to hold with the current popular theory of AGW I am free to think for myself, I do not think that I deserve the kind of treatment that is being dished out to myself and others. The truth does not necessarily lie with the majority.
    • CommentTimeOct 14th 2018 edited

    Painting yourself as a victim is a bit hard to take considering the number of real victims (injury, death, loss of livelihood) already starting to accumulate from the rearguard action obstructing solutions to climate breakdown.

    All those other things that you describe that you work on are good, and I share (and put some effort into) fixing some of them too. And I commend you for them.

    You are certainly allowed to think for yourself, but you and others rejecting AGW wilfully choosing to ignore the best science available is having consequences. The main effect on you would seem to be feeling slightly hurt. The effects on others are far larger and more unpleasant.

    How did your view of (other people) drinking and driving change over the years? (To be clear, I'm not accusing you of doing it.)

    For the record, I thought 'global warming' was hokum until fairly recently, but upon beginning to understand the likely risks, and that most of the solutions (such as some that you already support) are likely good things to do anyway, I changed my position. That is in my opinion the only rational and ethical position to take.

    I am also allowed to think for myself.


    • CommentAuthorbhommels
    • CommentTimeOct 15th 2018 edited
    I am quite baffled by the discussion so far. The work of the IPCC Working Group I, which assesses the scientific base behind global warming, is least discussed as the base case is quite clear cut. It is the policy implications that create the stir.

    Excuse me for getting pedantic for a bit. AGW is a "theory" and not a "fact" because this is not how science, and scientists work. Any theory has a probability attached, as you can never be 100% sure about anything. It does not mean AGW can be dismissed as "just a theory", or that it comes down to "believing" in AGW or not.

    Of course people can say and believe what they want, but physics does not care. Snooker players can just as well say they do not believe in Newtonian mechanics, for example.

    To dismiss AGW properly, you would have to come up with a New Theory instead, and explain all phenomena currently explained by AGW, and find an effect or extrapolation that can be properly explained by the New Theory and not by AGW.
    That, despite many vigorous efforts, has not happened yet. On the contrary, many scientists have inadvertedly found effects strengthening the case for AGW (BEST being a good example here). And with the overwhelming amount of facts and findings supporting AGW, finding a non-AGW New Theory is incredibly unlikely (note that I can't say impossible!)

    Of course we can go on ad infinitum discussing AGW red herrings, but the scientific evidence for AGW is so vast that a meaningful discussion about it requires trust in the science as presented, or studying it yourself.
    • CommentAuthorjamesingram
    • CommentTimeOct 15th 2018 edited
    people ask what can be done. i think this offers the way forward for a holistic approach,
    Its a solution that can be sold to those with the power to make change because its in their language

    I like your approach Tom but those with the real power to effect change will just consider it woo-woo
    so I think the approach in book you mentioned simply isnt pragmatic even if it may be possibly correct

    things are slowly moving forward , CC is just one issue amongst many , I personally think adaption to change is as, if not more, important than efforts to minimise the rate of change.
    • CommentTimeOct 15th 2018 edited
    Circular Economy concepts are good IMHO.

    My company is not able to do it *yet* with the current version of our smart heating product that we have in manufacturing, though we have as far as possible tried to make it as simple and small as possible, and repairable and recyclable.

    This is in the same vein:

    https://www.c2ccertified.org/ (the Cradle to Cradle Products Innovation Institute)

    and no, not totally woo-woo, but it *is* hard.


    • CommentTimeOct 15th 2018
    Link doesn't work ...
    which one Tom ?
    • CommentTimeOct 16th 2018
    • CommentTimeOct 17th 2018
    Works for me.
Add your comments

    Username Password
  • Format comments as
The Ecobuilding Buzz
Site Map    |   Home    |   View Cart    |   Pressroom   |   Business   |   Links   

© Green Building Press