CO2 emissions
As the home of the industrial revolution, the UK essentially produced all of the world's CO2 emissions until other countries caugh up. But in what year did we stop being the world's biggest CO2 producer? 1888, when the US overtook us.
The CO2 emissions in those early days were relatively large (all these figures come from Oak Ridge laboratory). By 1800 the UK is thought to have been producing 0.027 bn tonnes of CO2, compared with today's total of about 0.56 bn tonnes, so 5% of today's total. Furthermore by 1900 US C02 output was higher than the UK's today, whereas the UK's on that date was 0.42 bn tonnes, only 25% less than today.
Labels: environment
A new breed of super-efficient aircraft - nearly 100mpg!
This is a little unfair as The Times is hardly The Telegraph when it comes to statistical accuracy, and it's obvious what they mean here, but Tim's a very successful blogger and he does lots of this sort of stuff. Mmm, yes I am desperate. Click on the adverts - I have a tornadoed house to rebuild!
Aircraft use an average of four litres of fuel per 100km. But the next generation, including the Airbus A380 and Boeing 787, will use just under three litres per 100km.
Labels: economics, environment, newspapers
Value destruction
Two rather unfortunate developments have just knocked value off the house I am buying.
1. It has just been hit by a
tornado.
and worse, obviously;
2. The world's media are declaring that it is in Kensal Green, or worse than worse - Harlesden - whereas we are off the view it is Queen's Park.
Of course for a lot of people it has been far worse - one house looks totally destroyed. Remarkably no-one has died, though one man I believe has been taken to hospital.
Labels: economics, England, environment
Carbon[1] offsetting by lastminute.com
Much as the title says, basically. British Airways have been doing this, but not at the time you booked the flight (you were sent to a separate site). This is what
Felix was
asking for a few months ago, though personally I found the lastminute.com site not very good and never use it for flights.
I also have my doubts about the scability of carbon offsetting, which I said
here.
[1] Whoops I forgot the footnote in the title. I know it should be "Carbon dioxide" offsetting, and "Carbon dioxide credits" or CO2 credits etc. But when I put this in a comment on Tim's site I thought it sounded silly, so I'm going to stick with carbon.
Labels: economics, environment
