![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
And A World Is Doomed By Economics
Dec. 19th, 2009 05:48 pmSo, over the past couple of weeks a whole load of politicians have spent time having petty arguments about who's responsibility it is to cut emissions rather than accepting their own responsibilities to cut their own.
Upshot of which we have another document that basically says there is a problem and something needs to be done about it, without implementing any real actions to do anything meaningful (and certainly nothing legally binding, so they couldn't back out when the economics don't work out in their favour). The only real compromise seems to be from the developing countries forced into doing so for their own survival as they get hit sooner by the serious impacts of climate change. To top it all off, it wasn't even approved, only ratified.
It may be a "historic first step", but if the steps are all going to be this small, we're going to have to make a lot of them and very quickly. Rather than doing anything to tackle the issue at hand we've opted for the dragging our feet in a global "lets cut emissions, you go first" strategy.
Why did it end up like this?
We live in a system focused on promoting ones own profit rather than sharing resources equally between those that need them. However much the politicians wanted to put in place measures to address climate change, they couldn't do it at the risk of damaging their economic position.
And so we've done another loop of the climate change policy cycle. There will be more protests, more political talks, more academics researching the issues and a million other things that won't mean a thing without being acted on, but at this rate no real action will be taken until it's far too late.
The capitalist system has failed us all, whether your rich or poor, over the past 2 weeks, but we'll still worship it's feet in our millions because that's what we do.
Upshot of which we have another document that basically says there is a problem and something needs to be done about it, without implementing any real actions to do anything meaningful (and certainly nothing legally binding, so they couldn't back out when the economics don't work out in their favour). The only real compromise seems to be from the developing countries forced into doing so for their own survival as they get hit sooner by the serious impacts of climate change. To top it all off, it wasn't even approved, only ratified.
It may be a "historic first step", but if the steps are all going to be this small, we're going to have to make a lot of them and very quickly. Rather than doing anything to tackle the issue at hand we've opted for the dragging our feet in a global "lets cut emissions, you go first" strategy.
Why did it end up like this?
We live in a system focused on promoting ones own profit rather than sharing resources equally between those that need them. However much the politicians wanted to put in place measures to address climate change, they couldn't do it at the risk of damaging their economic position.
And so we've done another loop of the climate change policy cycle. There will be more protests, more political talks, more academics researching the issues and a million other things that won't mean a thing without being acted on, but at this rate no real action will be taken until it's far too late.
The capitalist system has failed us all, whether your rich or poor, over the past 2 weeks, but we'll still worship it's feet in our millions because that's what we do.
"Only when the last tree has died and the last river been poisoned and the last fish been caught will we realise we cannot eat money."
Artistic Carbon Capture
Dec. 6th, 2009 08:40 amThere are a number of things going on in the run up to Copenhagen to make the point about how serious climate change is.
One of the more interesting ones is this:
Alfio Bonanno and Christophe Cornubert have created a 1 ton cube of CO2. At 27-foot it's not inconsiderable.
Going on figures from the Guardian, each person in the UK, on average, produces nearly 10 of these each year. That's a lot of carbon, and yet it's nothing compared to places that the US, who produce twice as much per capita.
(via![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-syndicated.gif)
inhabitat)
One of the more interesting ones is this:
Alfio Bonanno and Christophe Cornubert have created a 1 ton cube of CO2. At 27-foot it's not inconsiderable.
Going on figures from the Guardian, each person in the UK, on average, produces nearly 10 of these each year. That's a lot of carbon, and yet it's nothing compared to places that the US, who produce twice as much per capita.
(via
inhabitat)
Musings on the Crest of the Wave
Dec. 5th, 2009 06:38 pmThis afternoon a substantial number of people (tens of thousands from what I gathered - I didn't try counting) marched from Grosvenor Square and surrounded the Houses of Parliament in the wave. The tail was still coming through Parliament Square as the front dispersed.
A substantial number of people voicing a concern about an issue that affects all of us and far too little is being down about. It would be nice if all the things being called for including pledges to cut emissions massively were agreed to at Copenhagen. It shouldn't take tens of thousands of people to get the government to actually do something about an issue that has been on the agenda for years though.
Unfortunately, our society gives louder voices to the huge corporations. It's not in the interest of these entities to cut emissions as there's no money to be made out of it, so they will resist the necessary changes to society. The insignificance of the changes to policy since the Stern report 3 years ago, just goes to show this.
Nobody wants climate chaos, but people are slaves to the corporate entities at all levels from the shop floor workers to the most senior managers. In a society based around money we all need it to pay the rent, mortgage, bills. Without it there's no roofs over our heads and no food to eat. We are all therefore reliant on these corporate entities and go along with them to a greater or lesser extent depending on our personal circumstance. If the profits of these entities are hit then it has a direct knock-on effect on the employees of that corporation and therefore on the people.
The government therefore places the needs of the economy above those of the people. After all, as the effects of a recession are felt much more in the short term than something like climate change, it's much easier to pretend that the latter is not happening.
In a system where money confers status and power, we need to spend to show we have it to promote our place in society. Profits need to grow to allow our status to grow. Both of which naturally require growth of production, whether we actually need the resulting goods or not, and hence an increased use of resources. Efficiency only really becomes necessary when resources become scarce and therefore expensive. Otherwise it's business as normal, produce more to sell more, convincing people they need to replace perfectly functional items to upgrade to the latest features that most of them won't ever use.
A system which actively seeks to increase consumption to grow profits is pushing in exactly the wrong direction to cut carbon emissions. You can impose limits on it, but the push will still be there and they will be actively seeking to increase those limits.
Hopefully Copenhagen will result in enough measures to prevent complete disaster, but the problem will still be there and unless we cut consumerism the shadow of climate chaos will always be looming over us ready to hit as soon as we let things slip slightly out of control.
The more I think about it, the more it seems that climate change isn't solvable within a capitalist system. If we seriously want to do something about it, we need to kill consumerism and move towards equality of status for all, so we don't need trinkets to prove ourselves worthy of society, we just consume according to our needs.
A substantial number of people voicing a concern about an issue that affects all of us and far too little is being down about. It would be nice if all the things being called for including pledges to cut emissions massively were agreed to at Copenhagen. It shouldn't take tens of thousands of people to get the government to actually do something about an issue that has been on the agenda for years though.
Unfortunately, our society gives louder voices to the huge corporations. It's not in the interest of these entities to cut emissions as there's no money to be made out of it, so they will resist the necessary changes to society. The insignificance of the changes to policy since the Stern report 3 years ago, just goes to show this.
Nobody wants climate chaos, but people are slaves to the corporate entities at all levels from the shop floor workers to the most senior managers. In a society based around money we all need it to pay the rent, mortgage, bills. Without it there's no roofs over our heads and no food to eat. We are all therefore reliant on these corporate entities and go along with them to a greater or lesser extent depending on our personal circumstance. If the profits of these entities are hit then it has a direct knock-on effect on the employees of that corporation and therefore on the people.
The government therefore places the needs of the economy above those of the people. After all, as the effects of a recession are felt much more in the short term than something like climate change, it's much easier to pretend that the latter is not happening.
In a system where money confers status and power, we need to spend to show we have it to promote our place in society. Profits need to grow to allow our status to grow. Both of which naturally require growth of production, whether we actually need the resulting goods or not, and hence an increased use of resources. Efficiency only really becomes necessary when resources become scarce and therefore expensive. Otherwise it's business as normal, produce more to sell more, convincing people they need to replace perfectly functional items to upgrade to the latest features that most of them won't ever use.
A system which actively seeks to increase consumption to grow profits is pushing in exactly the wrong direction to cut carbon emissions. You can impose limits on it, but the push will still be there and they will be actively seeking to increase those limits.
Hopefully Copenhagen will result in enough measures to prevent complete disaster, but the problem will still be there and unless we cut consumerism the shadow of climate chaos will always be looming over us ready to hit as soon as we let things slip slightly out of control.
The more I think about it, the more it seems that climate change isn't solvable within a capitalist system. If we seriously want to do something about it, we need to kill consumerism and move towards equality of status for all, so we don't need trinkets to prove ourselves worthy of society, we just consume according to our needs.
Shock News: Water Available on Tap!
Oct. 4th, 2009 07:59 amLondon's new drinking fountains a challenge to bottled water industry
Making tap water more available, so it's a viable alternative to bottled water when you're out somewhere and have forgotten to take any with you has to be a good thing. How many people will switch to using it will have to be seen though. Especially as the bottled water companies are guaranteed to respond by advertising about the so called benefits of bottled water over tap water as profits are far more important than the planet clearly.
I love the idea of one day London following in the footsteps of Bundanoon and banning bottled water, but I can't see it ever happening. The system we live in puts the welfare of companies before that of the people and planet and the bottled water industry is big and therefore powerful. We must therefore bow to their every whim in the interests of the economy.
Making tap water more available, so it's a viable alternative to bottled water when you're out somewhere and have forgotten to take any with you has to be a good thing. How many people will switch to using it will have to be seen though. Especially as the bottled water companies are guaranteed to respond by advertising about the so called benefits of bottled water over tap water as profits are far more important than the planet clearly.
I love the idea of one day London following in the footsteps of Bundanoon and banning bottled water, but I can't see it ever happening. The system we live in puts the welfare of companies before that of the people and planet and the bottled water industry is big and therefore powerful. We must therefore bow to their every whim in the interests of the economy.
Last week I made my first trip to the Shortwave, the new independent cinema in Bermondsey Square.
It's only got a small auditorium of about the same size as the bar out the front, but it's quite quaint. I particularly loved the way they have clearly got the seating second hand from somewhere else, so that all the seats have numbers, but are in almost an entirely random order. The padded walls are quite nice to lean on too.
Last Tuesday I went to see the 11th hour. It was quite well put together and certainly put it's message across well, but I felt they concentrated too much on scientists talking about the science, which just made it feel overly preachy. It also seemed to want to show all the potential doom from climate change, which meant it never went into any great depth about many of the points and you ended up with scientists making broad sweeping statements about climate change without seeing any of the evidence that backs them up even though it is out there.
All in all, it's very dramatic and thought provoking, but just not very rigourously argued. Maybe it's enough to get attention to the issue, but given it came out in 2007 and I'm not entirely sure it's that well known, maybe it won't manage that. If you want to see a film on this subject, Age of Stupid does a better job and shows it in a much more close to home way.
Then, on Wednesday there was End of the Line. Focusing on over-fishing gave this film the develop a much stronger argument than 11th hour and highlights the importance of checking the fish we consume is from a sustainable source (although it's easy for me to say that as I haven't eaten fish in years). They also gave a good blend of scientists explaining their research on quantities of fish stocks, people involved in the fish industry all over the world and the changes they've noticed, as well as reporters investigating the fish served in restaurants over here and it's origins. As such it does a good job of showing how our consumption here affects the stocks in the sea and also how to change this to be more sustainable even without giving up consuming fish.
Of the two, End of the Line is more worth seeing, which is convenient as it's the one that's just come out. In London, it's showing at the Greenwich Picturehouse tonight and then at the Prince Charles off Leicester Square tomorrow (Other UK screenings)
It's only got a small auditorium of about the same size as the bar out the front, but it's quite quaint. I particularly loved the way they have clearly got the seating second hand from somewhere else, so that all the seats have numbers, but are in almost an entirely random order. The padded walls are quite nice to lean on too.
Last Tuesday I went to see the 11th hour. It was quite well put together and certainly put it's message across well, but I felt they concentrated too much on scientists talking about the science, which just made it feel overly preachy. It also seemed to want to show all the potential doom from climate change, which meant it never went into any great depth about many of the points and you ended up with scientists making broad sweeping statements about climate change without seeing any of the evidence that backs them up even though it is out there.
All in all, it's very dramatic and thought provoking, but just not very rigourously argued. Maybe it's enough to get attention to the issue, but given it came out in 2007 and I'm not entirely sure it's that well known, maybe it won't manage that. If you want to see a film on this subject, Age of Stupid does a better job and shows it in a much more close to home way.
Then, on Wednesday there was End of the Line. Focusing on over-fishing gave this film the develop a much stronger argument than 11th hour and highlights the importance of checking the fish we consume is from a sustainable source (although it's easy for me to say that as I haven't eaten fish in years). They also gave a good blend of scientists explaining their research on quantities of fish stocks, people involved in the fish industry all over the world and the changes they've noticed, as well as reporters investigating the fish served in restaurants over here and it's origins. As such it does a good job of showing how our consumption here affects the stocks in the sea and also how to change this to be more sustainable even without giving up consuming fish.
Of the two, End of the Line is more worth seeing, which is convenient as it's the one that's just come out. In London, it's showing at the Greenwich Picturehouse tonight and then at the Prince Charles off Leicester Square tomorrow (Other UK screenings)
Emptying the Milk out of the fridge
Jul. 22nd, 2009 12:25 pmI've always been quite uncomfortable with the issue of breeding animals entirely for our own consumption (whether as food or consumables). It seems somewhat wrong to give an animal a life entirely so we can take it away again.
When I was younger I didn't really like most vegetables, so I didn't really have a lot of choice, but to just go along with things, but as I grew up and started trying and liking new foods it started to become more feasible. It was foot and mouth which really put the final nail in the coffin of my meat eating. I was really uncomfortable that our food industries took so much precidents over the lives and welfare of the livestock involved.
One morning 6 years ago, whilst putting my boots on it struck me that there was no particular reason why I had to strap a bit of dead cow onto my feet everyday and it was a bit unfair that this cow's enter purpose in life was so that bits of it could become tied to my foot. I've been vegetarian ever since and I'm now so used to not eating meat I couldn't imagine doing it any more.
However, something that has caused me to remain uncomfortable is the fact I've continued to eat eggs and diary products, which still support the same industry as eating meat. OK, you don't have to kill a cow to source it's milk, but as soon as it stops being productive it will still get bundled off to the abattoir as it's not commercially viable to keep it alive.
I know quite a few vegans and there have been a few conversations with various people lately that are making me think that phasing these out of my diet may not be as hard as it originally seemed when I turned veggie.
In the end I was watching 11th hour last night, which got me thinking about my personal impact on the climate. OK, reducing this doesn't make a huge difference on the grand scheme of things, but it did get me thinking that currently, my electricity usage is fairly low, I don't drive and walk rather than using public transport where possible (after all I've grown these nice long legs, might as well make use of them), I don't eat meat, etc, etc. It then occured to me, that if I wanted to reduce my impact further the easiest way would be through cutting out dairy products.
OK, it's not exactly going to save the planet, but it's not really my main reason for doing it, it's just enough to get me to realise it's possible and worth trying.
I've got a fridge full of milk and cheese and stuff, so I'm going to use that up first and then see how I get on from there.
When I was younger I didn't really like most vegetables, so I didn't really have a lot of choice, but to just go along with things, but as I grew up and started trying and liking new foods it started to become more feasible. It was foot and mouth which really put the final nail in the coffin of my meat eating. I was really uncomfortable that our food industries took so much precidents over the lives and welfare of the livestock involved.
One morning 6 years ago, whilst putting my boots on it struck me that there was no particular reason why I had to strap a bit of dead cow onto my feet everyday and it was a bit unfair that this cow's enter purpose in life was so that bits of it could become tied to my foot. I've been vegetarian ever since and I'm now so used to not eating meat I couldn't imagine doing it any more.
However, something that has caused me to remain uncomfortable is the fact I've continued to eat eggs and diary products, which still support the same industry as eating meat. OK, you don't have to kill a cow to source it's milk, but as soon as it stops being productive it will still get bundled off to the abattoir as it's not commercially viable to keep it alive.
I know quite a few vegans and there have been a few conversations with various people lately that are making me think that phasing these out of my diet may not be as hard as it originally seemed when I turned veggie.
In the end I was watching 11th hour last night, which got me thinking about my personal impact on the climate. OK, reducing this doesn't make a huge difference on the grand scheme of things, but it did get me thinking that currently, my electricity usage is fairly low, I don't drive and walk rather than using public transport where possible (after all I've grown these nice long legs, might as well make use of them), I don't eat meat, etc, etc. It then occured to me, that if I wanted to reduce my impact further the easiest way would be through cutting out dairy products.
OK, it's not exactly going to save the planet, but it's not really my main reason for doing it, it's just enough to get me to realise it's possible and worth trying.
I've got a fridge full of milk and cheese and stuff, so I'm going to use that up first and then see how I get on from there.
End of the Line for New Cinema
Jul. 20th, 2009 12:59 pmThe Shortwave cinema, which has recently opened in Bermondsey Square, is showing 3 films on Climate Change (and related topics) this week as part of the London Bridge Festival.
Tonight - Age of Stupid
Tomorrow - 11th Hour
Wednesday - End of the Line
All at 7.30 pm.
Conveniently they've put the one I've already seen to clash with Thrales Practice tonigh (Age of Stupid is an excellent film though - review here), but I'm aiming to go to 11th Hour and End of the Line.
Tickets available here - although there currently seems to be loads of them.
Tonight - Age of Stupid
Tomorrow - 11th Hour
Wednesday - End of the Line
All at 7.30 pm.
Conveniently they've put the one I've already seen to clash with Thrales Practice tonigh (Age of Stupid is an excellent film though - review here), but I'm aiming to go to 11th Hour and End of the Line.
Tickets available here - although there currently seems to be loads of them.
An Inventive Way To Save The Planet
Jun. 1st, 2009 01:02 pmToday's ![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
foe_tips, offers the following piece of advice for helping to tackle climate change:
Presumably, they don't quite mean it in the way that springs to mind...
Oh, and 75
foe_tips, offers the following piece of advice for helping to tackle climate change:Have a Clothes Swap Party!
Presumably, they don't quite mean it in the way that springs to mind...
Oh, and 75
Age Of Stupid
Apr. 1st, 2009 09:56 pmSo, I went and watched Age of Stupid this evening.
Pete Postlethwaite stars as a man living in an environmental wasteland in 2055 looking back how we were now and what we could have done to change that. He basically acts as a narrator looking through all the climate change related news articles there have been during the past few years and commenting on how little we're doing about it.
It's very moving and very scary.
It's strange to see how much in denial we are about all this.
I came out thinking back to how much media coverage it all got when the Stern Report came out in 2006 and how much everyone was saying "This is bad, we must do something", and yet something else comes along it gets forgotten about and here we are 2 and a half years later and not a lot has changed.
Given that a lot of scientists seem to be saying we need to cut our emissions dramatically by 2015 to avoid irreversible catastrophic climate change, it's seems absolutely terrifying that a quarter of that time has gone and we've barely started to do anything about it.
Instead we just sit there saying that we support doing something to prevent climate change, but we're not going to get rid of our own gas guzzling cars or we can't have a wind farm spoiling our nice view (a point covered quite well in the film) or we're not going to give up our cheap holiday flights, etc, etc, etc. We just want to continue consuming and won't accept the consequences.
Just looking at the film itself, it's doesn't seem to be showing very widely. I went to see it at the Greenwich Picturehouse, and even there it's not having many screenings and those it is having are at 6pm, which is awkward to get to if your working 9-5 elsewhere. There were 6 of us in the cinema watching it in total and two of them left part way through. It seems people just don't want to know. Ignorance is bliss, but at what cost?
OK, there have been people protesting about climate change as part of the G20 protests today, but there have been people protesting about a lot of things and it just seems that a lot of the messages people want to put across are just getting lost amongst the noise.
The more I look at the way we're acting over this, the more it seems that we don't really care and we're all just happy to be doomed as long as we can enjoy the moment. Please prove me wrong world...
For those of you that care: notstupid.org
Pete Postlethwaite stars as a man living in an environmental wasteland in 2055 looking back how we were now and what we could have done to change that. He basically acts as a narrator looking through all the climate change related news articles there have been during the past few years and commenting on how little we're doing about it.
It's very moving and very scary.
It's strange to see how much in denial we are about all this.
I came out thinking back to how much media coverage it all got when the Stern Report came out in 2006 and how much everyone was saying "This is bad, we must do something", and yet something else comes along it gets forgotten about and here we are 2 and a half years later and not a lot has changed.
Given that a lot of scientists seem to be saying we need to cut our emissions dramatically by 2015 to avoid irreversible catastrophic climate change, it's seems absolutely terrifying that a quarter of that time has gone and we've barely started to do anything about it.
Instead we just sit there saying that we support doing something to prevent climate change, but we're not going to get rid of our own gas guzzling cars or we can't have a wind farm spoiling our nice view (a point covered quite well in the film) or we're not going to give up our cheap holiday flights, etc, etc, etc. We just want to continue consuming and won't accept the consequences.
Just looking at the film itself, it's doesn't seem to be showing very widely. I went to see it at the Greenwich Picturehouse, and even there it's not having many screenings and those it is having are at 6pm, which is awkward to get to if your working 9-5 elsewhere. There were 6 of us in the cinema watching it in total and two of them left part way through. It seems people just don't want to know. Ignorance is bliss, but at what cost?
OK, there have been people protesting about climate change as part of the G20 protests today, but there have been people protesting about a lot of things and it just seems that a lot of the messages people want to put across are just getting lost amongst the noise.
The more I look at the way we're acting over this, the more it seems that we don't really care and we're all just happy to be doomed as long as we can enjoy the moment. Please prove me wrong world...
For those of you that care: notstupid.org
The Age Of Stupid
Mar. 26th, 2009 12:34 pmWhen I was in Cambridge, I always liked the Arts Picturehouse cinema, even for more mainstream films. It had a certain quaintness, which the larger Warner Bros (now Vue) cinema at the Grafton centre lacked.
So, when I left and moved down to London I had a look to see if I could find one around here. The closest I could find (given I was living in Croydon at the time), was the new one they were about to open in Greenwich and I've been on their mailing list ever since.
Now I'm living a bit closer to Greenwich I've been meaning to try to get out to see something there.
I've just looked at this week's email and this has caught my eye:
The only free evenings I've got next week are Wednesday and Thursday, so I think I'll probably aim for the 6pm Weds showing.
If anyone else fancies coming along, do let me know.
So, when I left and moved down to London I had a look to see if I could find one around here. The closest I could find (given I was living in Croydon at the time), was the new one they were about to open in Greenwich and I've been on their mailing list ever since.
Now I'm living a bit closer to Greenwich I've been meaning to try to get out to see something there.
I've just looked at this week's email and this has caught my eye:
Pete Postlethwaite stars in THE AGE OF STUPID (12A) as a man living in an environmental wasteland in 2055, looking back at footage from 2008 and asking: why didn't we save ourselves when we had the chance?
The only free evenings I've got next week are Wednesday and Thursday, so I think I'll probably aim for the 6pm Weds showing.
If anyone else fancies coming along, do let me know.
The Cows of New Cross
Mar. 25th, 2009 08:44 amHaving grown up in rural Cumbria, it wasn't unusual to see cows grazing in the fields nearby.
Don't often see cows grazing in London though, I was therefore very much surprised when I saw some outside Goldsmiths in New Cross last night:
The local cows certainly look a lot different to the ones up north!
Feed the cows
Don't often see cows grazing in London though, I was therefore very much surprised when I saw some outside Goldsmiths in New Cross last night:
The local cows certainly look a lot different to the ones up north!
Feed the cows
Greenest Brands
Apr. 8th, 2008 05:38 pmJust spotted this in this week's Harpers:
Seems strange to judge which brands are greenest based entirely on the opinions of a few marketing professionals. Surely the whole point of marketing is to skew people's opinion in favour of certain brands anyway?
I'm always amused by how the press can find and publish completely and utterly meaningless statistics and put them in front of you as if they might actually inform you of something.
More amusing, in this case, however, is the fact that, according to this, a major oil company (BP) is greener than a major environmental campaigning organisation (Greenpeace). Clearly, Greenpeace really had better clean up their act...
10 Greenest BrandsSource: Marketing Week survey of 1,000 marketing professionals
- Marks & Spencer
- The Body Shop
- Innocent
- Co-op
- ECover
- Honda
- Waitrose
- Tesco
- BP
- Greenpeace
Seems strange to judge which brands are greenest based entirely on the opinions of a few marketing professionals. Surely the whole point of marketing is to skew people's opinion in favour of certain brands anyway?
I'm always amused by how the press can find and publish completely and utterly meaningless statistics and put them in front of you as if they might actually inform you of something.
More amusing, in this case, however, is the fact that, according to this, a major oil company (BP) is greener than a major environmental campaigning organisation (Greenpeace). Clearly, Greenpeace really had better clean up their act...
B&Q to stop selling patio heaters
Definitely sounds like a good move, but it is interesting to note:
Hmmm, keep warm outside for 13 hours or have 5,200 cups of tea? I think I know which one I choose...
Definitely sounds like a good move, but it is interesting to note:
The Energy Saving Trust has estimated that a propane patio heater with a heat output of 12.5kW will produce around 34.9kg of CO2 before the fuel runs out (after approximately 13 hours). This is equivalent to the energy required to produce approximately 5,200 cups of tea (or 400 cups for every hour of operation)
Hmmm, keep warm outside for 13 hours or have 5,200 cups of tea? I think I know which one I choose...
