well as im not a parent and have no intention of being or even a grand parent then my answer to this question is fuk em !

and to answer the question of climate change ..the climate allways bloody changes ..has been since the earth was formed and will still do long after we as humans will have died out .

uh huh. but why does it happen? look at the history.

it happens when co2 increases or decreases. that can happen for a lot of reasons. in the past it happened because of various natural causes. like volcanism. changing habitats. why is it happening now? ...where's all the co2 coming from? us. industry. fossil fuel consumption. deforestation. that last one will be the real killer. because forests and plant life in general use c02. so we are removing the things that breathe co2 and put out oxygen...and building more industry creating more co2.

*"duh" headsmack*

honestly.

Climate change is happening, yes. We have a hand on it, yes.


But, I'm more on the side that we are making it happening faster, not the sole reason why it happens.

absaloute tosh ! worst statement ever ! .... in the middle ages here in the
UK we used to grow grapes ...yes here in the UK we had vinyards ... also in the 18th century our elders used to ice skate on the river thames ........WHICH WAS WELL BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION !!!!


facts young padwan !! get your facts RIGHT ! before jumping on the bandwagon !

im not suggesting we arnt assisting ...but FFS ! cows fart more c02 than we produce ...shall we kill all of them aswell ....

"duh!" headbutt to the fkn face for uninformed stupid post !

Fun fact!

We grew grapes and made wine when part of the Roman empire. Infact we made wine until a cultural change and a love for Mead in the dark ages, it wasn't picked up again in the uk until the mid 20th century due to a lack of knowledge even though we could grow them.

Fun fact 2!

It is now widely believed that a mild ice age was averted around 7000bc due to the spread of farming.

It used to be natural, now its just us being stupid

Welcome to the Anthropocene age.

absaloute tosh ! worst statement ever ! .... in the middle ages here in the
UK we used to grow grapes ...yes here in the UK we had vinyards ... also in the 18th century our elders used to ice skate on the river thames ........WHICH WAS WELL BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION !!!!


facts young padwan !! get your facts RIGHT ! before jumping on the bandwagon !

im not suggesting we arnt assisting ...but FFS ! cows fart more c02 than we produce ...shall we kill all of them aswell ....

"duh!" headbutt to the fkn face for uninformed stupid post !

facts young padwan !! get your facts RIGHT ! before jumping on the bandwagon !

im not suggesting we arnt assisting ...but FFS ! cows fart more c02 than we produce ...shall we kill all of them aswell ....

"duh!" headbutt to the fkn face for uninformed stupid post !

sauce?
I believe you im just qurious

Of course one of the big problems that doesn't get mentioned much, too many people. Politically a trick one to approach though.

Fighting back climate change is not about saving the planet. It's just about saving our sorry asses.

You can not save the humanity from itself.

"What if the climate change is one big hoax and we are just creating a better world for nothing"

- Some comic I once came across.

See! They can make a music video against reality! Thus reality is not real! (Or not as real as the OT God, who would go friggin' balistic if you denied him)

Of course. But we're here because of all the ones who fought the good fight.

Of course. But we're here because of all the ones who fought the good fight.

sauce?
I believe you im just qurious

And now the current and next few generations are going to screw it all up...:P


I was going to post that video too, which states that the planet has gone thru hell in all it's existence, but it's still here and only the dominant species living on the planet at the time changes, so it's inevitable unless some drastic laws are put into place that people will not like, like what was done in china for 30 years and recently lifted:


1 child per family or perhaps encouraging killing yourself once you reach a certain age where you can't work anymore, can't pay taxes like you used to, but the health insurance costs go thru the roof because you get sick much more often, and the unfortunate reality is that for many people they are serious conditions with no cure yet, and they still receive their government pensions just the same, from government in each country getting more broke and in debt, every decade that passes.


I'm sure this will end up fine....

Implying that the people that are now in their fifties right now didn't screw everything up already.

It's a self-correcting problem. Or will be once agriculture is affected. For example, oil. A lot of middle east countries subsidize bread for the masses. Farming requires oil. When the oil prices went up, farming cost more, wheat prices went up[1], bread prices went up and countries like Egypt had to cut back on bread subsidies which caused angst amongst the masses.

Last I checked, the US exports 50% of the wheat it grows. When climate change impacts US food production, countries in the Middle East are going to have a difficult time feeding their people. The people revolt, Middle East oil production slows to a crawl. Any industrial country dependent on Middle East oil will suddenly be using less oil.

See, it's a self-correcting problem. Well, unless Canada[1] or Siberia, once they thaw out, become the world's breadbasket(s).


[1] Between 2006 and 2008 average world prices for rice rose by 217%, wheat by 136%, corn by 125% and soybeans by 107%. In late April 2008 rice prices hit 24 cents (U.S.) per U.S. pound, more than doubling the price in just seven months.

[2] The US will annex Canada because of climate change.

Well the only logical thing to do is start producing more CO2, get the Earth to warm up a little, thus allowing crops to grow better due to the increased warmth as they do. But as long as these globalists keep harping on how we need to cut CO2, it will only lead to starvation and war.

And the growth in population and all the trees that have to be cut down to make more farm land available, which also absorb CO2 and release the very oxygen we need to breathe?


A lot of Crops don't generate the air one needs to survive, only the leafy green variety do and not as well as a fully grown trees...

See guys, what more proof do you need in this thread. DW and I are at opposite ends of the issue as usual. Really, give that some thought...

I'm looking out my window, I see a farm. No trees were sacrificed to make that farm. In fact, I have about 100 trees on my property, where none were before. My neighborhood has 1000's of trees where none were before. But that farm, how dare them have warmer temperatures to better grow crops, how dare them! Greater yields per acre! it's just inhumanity to man it is. Think of the children!!

Really, get out of the city, dude, there is a whole big world out there where things grow and trees are not automatically ripped down to plant some corn or rice etc. Don't buy into the lies of those filthy rich globalists elitists, they don't give a squat about you, and would prefer famine and war over food and electricity for the 7bil inhabitants of this world... which only around 1bil currently having access to air conditioning even. Many not even a light bulb. I care about them, not stupid hokey religions based on hockey sticks.

Even the seeds for many types of crops are already genetically modified to grow faster, larger and need less water and also needing less pesticides...

Wrong again. Look over that McDonald's thread here in OOPE, I posted and linked general info how that is a complete failure. If anything, that is just yet another nail in our coffin. Don't suck up the propaganda every salesman shoves into your face, be it Monsanto/EPA, globalists/environmentalists or even SC devs for that matter. They are all just trying to get rich off you, buddy.

Wrong again. Look over that McDonald's thread here in OOPE, I posted and linked general info how that is a complete failure. If anything, that is just yet another nail in our coffin. Don't suck up the propaganda every salesman shoves into your face, be it Monsanto/EPA, globalists/environmentalists or even SC devs for that matter. They are all just trying to get rich off you, buddy.

So with an ever growing population that demands ever more food, power, water, housing, jobs, transportation, schools, hospitals, goods shipped from one continent to another, generates more pollution as it grows, how is it you you feel we can modify and keep control of the overall situation indefinitely?

I don't follow you here...

BTW, the same climate crud I heard back in the 70's that we were all suppose to be dead from already, long ago, freakin running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

[quote=Webvan]

Suffice to say they got their data a tad off methinks.

Just saw the latest cosmos show speaking exactly about this topic funny enough, and in 1958 the annual output of C02 gas from all industries as well as volcanic eruptions and anything else that could contribute to the total was 6 billion tons.


Today, it totals 30 billion tons...A 5 fold increase in just 50 years, so we can imagine what the result will be like if we double the population in the next 50 years and still keep to burning oil, natural gas and coal as main energy providers.



We've gone from 300 milligrams of carbon dioxide, which has been the reference for the last 800 000 years to 450 milligrams since the industrial revolution started in the late 1800's and 600 milligrams is the tipping point where there's no going back, it might reach that mark by the end of this century and the earth gradually turns into another Venus.....Scary **** ladies and gents.



Action needs to be taken on a global scale involving every country, not just localized projects anymore to have enough time to reverse the tend and scientists knew this since the late 1880's, they did the math and 80 years later, NASA( in 1958) confirmed them as being on the money, but short term goals like cheap oil, natural gas and coal still dominated and we lived on a year to year basis even back then, and what would happen 100~200 years later, they didn't care.


Strangely similar attitude to what's happening now but we have much less time to react, even if our technology is more advanced than it was back then.....lobbies, politics, the money it would take for this massive project on a world wide scale, and do we have enough time left to pull this off and change our destiny....Seems we always have to have our backs to the wall to react.

Well the only logical thing to do is start producing more CO2, get the Earth to warm up a little, thus allowing crops to grow better due to the increased warmth as they do. But as long as these globalists keep harping on how we need to cut CO2, it will only lead to starvation and war.

Lol, that's what I always used to say to my buddies.

Use more of that stuff the faster it's gone the faster people might come to their senses.

best way to cut CO2 is to stop breathing.

haha just a little off...
Where I live now, when it's winter time we have "no burn days", we cant light a fire in the fire place to heat our homes in the dead of winter. The fear is some little kid ten miles away may get a whiff of the smoke and go into convulsions. We are polluting teh world with our smokes. Serious, they have PA's on the radio with a little girl about in tears over it, "pleas don't light a fire" etc etc. They are taught to be hypersensitive and scared out of their wits. A whiff of smoke sending them into asthma attacks if not triggered by their conditioning training.

Odd because I grew up in LA, grade school in the 70's, GenX and all that. One time they took us out on a field trip, to just a local park. They made us sit on the bus for two hours because it was a smoggy day... and the teacher started to tell us how teh world was going to end real soon like. Trying to brain wash us, and we just laughed at first... until the torture of just sitting on a hot crowded bus set in. I mean big deal, we were in smog every day, it was LA in the 70's and none of us kids were sick, actually everyone was fit in those days compared to all the fat sedentary sick kids today. We finally started about rioting, they gave up and let us off lol. They never reached us, and our grade schrewl official grad music was this, but not until a near riot when at first they denied our near unanimous vote for it.

Now kids are scared. They start on them with this really young. Little kids not old enough to reason for themselves, being scared into nightmares that the world will end over this garbage before they even grow up. Like this source that points it out but I don't exactly agree with his full position. One thing for sure, it's being waaay blown out of proportion, and they are becoming more skilled at torturing little kids out of their wits with this garbage. The same pitch they tried to sell us on in the 70's, just more deviously delivered now after a many numbers of years to practice. It's bunk!

You might be on to something there, we should device a plan to achive that world wide.

Odd because I grew up in LA, grade school in the 70's, GenX and all that. One time they took us out on a field trip, to just a local park. They made us sit on the bus for two hours because it was a smoggy day... and the teacher started to tell us how teh world was going to end real soon like. Trying to brain wash us, and we just laughed at first... until the torture of just sitting on a hot crowded bus set in. I mean big deal, we were in smog every day, it was LA in the 70's and none of us kids were sick, actually everyone was fit in those days compared to all the fat sedentary sick kids today. We finally started about rioting, they gave up and let us off lol. They never reached us, and our grade schrewl official grad music was this, but not until a near riot when at first they denied our near unanimous vote for it.

Lol, that's what I always used to say to my buddies.

Use more of that stuff the faster it's gone the faster people might come to their senses.

Crop yield is actually worse with higher C02 levels.

warmer climate might actually make places like Greenland arable, or at least a major portion of it, together with raising the arable land lines on Siberia and Canada.

While more CO2 is bad for crops, It is more worrying what the effect of more atmospheric CO2 might have on general health. Decreased crop yeld per square km is only that bad if you actually lose those square km on where to farm.



then again, the loss of square km by sea level rising might counterbalance those square km we gain by the receding permafrost on the northern hemisphere.

Greenland and the permafrost areas will not be good for growing crops, there isnt the soil there for them. When it melts it will at best be moorland and at worst, a desert. It will take 3000 years at least before there is enough soil to grow crops in these areas. We have also lost something like 30% of farmable land in the last 200 years due to expanding cities, desertification and other environmental changes.

I for one can't wait to live underwater here in Florida. Maybe we can find some magic seaslugs that give magical powers when this happens.

It's failing. The sales pitch they use are the original promises, but since the introduction of these crops the use of herbicides and pesticides goes up 25% each year (guess you didn't bother to check out my links for researching what I claimed). Meanwhile farms are being poisoned with this high usage of chemicals, the ground contaminated, as well as adjacent farms being effected in a lot of ways even though they may themselves be traditional or organic farms. It's just a matter of time before complete failure, but in the meantime they get rich. Famine and war will most likely follow, famine can do that.

Even if global warming/climate change were real, pfff the coffin may be nailed shut long before any real results for that ever actually kicks in, from failing farms which is happening now and for real. BTW, the same climate crud I heard back in the 70's that we were all suppose to be dead from already, long ago, freakin running around like chickens with their heads cut off.

Now they screw with the numbers, caught red handed doing that, same chart that HBO guy flashed behind him on the screen in the OP vid, and I linked that vid that someone interested in research may get a start off of. That vid was all whitewash in the OP, only around 50% are fooled from it enough to care at all, not the 75-90%. We can invent numbers for public opinions or actual climate data all day long, they certainly did for the climate data already. It's good business I guess, lots of money to be made. Monsanto, green energy, environmental regulation, book deals, movies, talk circuits, research grants etc etc etc. Big paydays to be hads.

Action is being taken, sort of, the EU has pretty stringent regulations when it comes to emissions. Why they'd close down a nuclear plant tho is beyond me, but fact of the matter is that the majority of people with access to technology have a small carbon footprint. It's just that there's a lot of them. For example, China gives out more emissions that the US of A by a good margin, since it has about 4x the pop, even tho the average amount per capita is sporting a 3:1 ratio in favour of the USA.

But now imagine if china does reach the same level of living that's in the USA and end up having the same carbon footprint per capita, and with all that population?...Yikes.


Their the only economy that is still growing by leaps and bounds( between 8 and 10% per year), and already surpass the USA in GDP....New lion in coming into town and even the USA speaks gently about them as they have nukes and they control about 1.5 trillion of the USA debt in government bonds, so tough talk won't work.

I'm sorry but as a financial analyst i find this data about china totally hilarious. They're lucky to get 7-7.5% today (and a lot of private financial houses question the official figures with a HUGE pinch of salt since independent figures are nigh on impossible to get) and are cooling faster and faster with a very bad housing bubble yet to burst. Not to mention their capital outflow issues. Which is music to my ears.

Hold your horses on China. Like all us sensible financial people are doing.

[

absaloute tosh ! worst statement ever ! .... in the middle ages here in the
UK we used to grow grapes ...yes here in the UK we had vinyards ... also in the 18th century our elders used to ice skate on the river thames ........WHICH WAS WELL BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION !!!!


facts young padwan !! get your facts RIGHT ! before jumping on the bandwagon !

im not suggesting we arnt assisting ...but FFS ! cows fart more c02 than we produce ...shall we kill all of them aswell ....

"duh!" headbutt to the fkn face for uninformed stupid post !

The main driver of this climate change BS is the carbon tax scam.
There you go, a piggybank from nothing. It's a classic.

as an environmentally conscious petrolhead, I do believe that anything that can make my wheeled passions greener is good.


Carbon tax however, does not and it's horrible. Here in Europe, the shift towards diesel-powered vehicles is quite lol-worthy as they require more costly maintenance, and they actually pollute a bit more if not properly maintained. Yes, in terms of power and useability, diesel engines are nice. Thanks to them we actually got a nice technology boost on turbocharger development and direct-injection technologies, which later applied to petrol engines, and made them much greener and performing.

Honestly, and in the case of my country, as I usually say: petrol engine cars' only expensive running cost is the fuel, while diesel engine cars' only cheap running cost is the fuel.

As a diesel owner I have to say I haven't had any engine issues but I do own a new (2010) car. -ú20 road tax

I do find it odd as a Brit that Americans aren't demanding the same kind of mpg quality that we get. Mitsubishi are advertising a new SUV hybrid over here and claim it gets 148 MPG, its a lie, but it will be getting over 70-80 mpg which for a big car like this is very good.

absaloute tosh ! worst statement ever ! .... in the middle ages here in the
UK we used to grow grapes ...yes here in the UK we had vinyards ... also in the 18th century our elders used to ice skate on the river thames ........WHICH WAS WELL BEFORE THE INDUSTRIAL REVOLUTION !!!!

I've heard the Mazda Atenza diesel gets very good MPG. But i hardly ever drive in Tokyo, so much easier to take the train.

as an environmentally conscious petrolhead, I do believe that anything that can make my wheeled passions greener is good.

Well my little 1.4 diesel Citroen C3

Since one of china's arguments (and a valid one for once) is that the USA enjoyed economic growth for the past 60+ years and didn't care about pollution at all or global warming, and now the USA is dictating what china should be doing on the pollution matter( which it is very polluted), but there's all these economic tensions between both if the fight gets really nasty, is why nothing will change for the 2 countries that contribute the most to pollution.

petrol smells a bit better than manure tho





I know the most recent C3 is better looking than the first gen, but... dude....

Better quality too. Its actually a good car and a 1.6 not a 1.4.

I now have a problem though because any new car I get must have a panoramic windscreen.

Toyota? As I said above, their D4-D engines are good.

Still got a few years left in the C3 before I would want something new so I'll likely look into the next gen hybrids.

The fact is that China's environmental issues are hitting them harder and faster than any other country in the world. And the country is so populated, and the issues are so massive and severe, that they just can't bury their head in the sand as the USA do. "Environmental issues" are quite more real when every year your capital spends months breathing your fertile soil.

The good news is that China is prone to swinging the pendulum and shift their collective mind very fast, and so if they decide that they must go full green, they will totally and completey whipe the floor with everything every other country has done before. But also if they determine it's time to go full nuts and don't give a f of environment, they will destroy the world as we know it.

not seeing many evolutions on the hybrids for the next few years, besides maybe lighter batteries.

all in all, and things considered, specially the price of such vehicles, you're either better off in a car with an engine with very small displacement, if it's for going around town, or something akin to a 1.6L with forced induction for longer travels, or going full electric.

This is all considering if you don't want engines with power, of course. At the moment I'm trying to get an older car with a relatively large engine but more geared to torque and not HP. Early 90's 2.2litre accord for example is a car that has nice figures for such a large displacement engine, and it's quite reliable and comfortable, even considering the age of it. The F22-series block is a heck of an engine.

So, seems America just lurched forwards a little in dealing with its dirty coal powerstations.

(...)

So it's a powder keg just waiting for a detonator to set it off sooner or later as it continues it's build up politically, economically and militarily, and pollution isn't a high priority unless it's a public event to save face.

I have worked at nissan and got to talk with some lads from their R&D and there are some very interesting things on the way. Expect self cleaning paint and "transparent metal" rather than glass. There is also work being done on carbon scrubbers and fuel cells.

yeah but how long until this tech gets cheap enough to be used in smaller, cheap cars that anyone can buy? One of the issues I had and still have with hybrid vehicles is that you get less "car" for the price they ask for. There are a few, rare exceptions like the Insight, but it's also a kinda big car for a very tiny powerplant.

The next few years. The next decade will be a lot of fun for petrol heads.

uh huh. but why does it happen? look at the history.

it happens when co2 increases or decreases. that can happen for a lot of reasons. in the past it happened because of various natural causes. like volcanism. changing habitats. why is it happening now? ...where's all the co2 coming from? us. industry. fossil fuel consumption. deforestation. that last one will be the real killer. because forests and plant life in general use c02. so we are removing the things that breathe co2 and put out oxygen...and building more industry creating more co2.

*"duh" headsmack*

Actually trees are our most renewable resource. There are hybrid poplar farms that can cut 10 acres a day while they have 10 acres that come into maturity, every day. This makes paper very cheap; add in recycling and there is no reason we can not reforest much of the deforested lands. We just need to just start planting.

So, seems America just lurched forwards a little in dealing with its dirty coal powerstations.

As I said, Chinese environmental issues are massive, and it's a densely populated country. Losing 40% of their farmlands is no joke, and then mind this: some of those lands had been exploited continuosly for 7,000 years and now are literally gone forever.

Floods, sandstorms, salinization, desertification, pollution of every sort (air/water/land), China's disasters are as massive as the population. They can't bury their heads in the sand the American way nor pretend it's a PR issue.

Just ask yourself, "What would a dinosaur do?"

just had a eureka moment ! if the global temeperatures rise off the scale then just think how much cheaper it would to **** the polar caps for resources its a win win ... we can shoot penguins and polar bears whilst getting cheap oil !!!


whats not to like

ahhh but conspiracy theorists reckon theres a top secret alien base there ...plus apparently the nzisa have a bolt hole there from WW2

didn't an American fleet pop down there in the 50`s to have a butchers to see ?..... and got there butts kicked !


I seen it on youtube ! IT MUST BE TRUE !!!!!!!!!

The rainforests are where it's really crucial. And there is very little in the way of replanting concern as far as I know

Very true, but the ability to grow trees at an accelerated rate is completely possible. So much of Great Britian's deforested land is still sitting treeless and unused. Forests have for eons been destoryed by nature and rebuilt by nature. Why can we not do the same thing? I am not implying that this is an easy or a quick fix, but it is the easiest thing we can do to target the biggest problem. We are not going to deccelerate our fossile fuel use, even though I believe conservation is a smart tactic to utilize.

UK is built on coal ....supposed to be enough to last over 500 years ..... my old town had one of the biggest coal mines in the world ....but it just wasn't viable ..as we could buy it cheaper from south America than dig it out of the ground ... miners got too powerful and tried to hold the country to ransom ...so aunt Maggie shut them down ... lol ..must confess id rather do what im doing now ...than work in a fkn coal mine


but now ...we can frack frack frack to our hearts delight ...job done imo

We can do that. While there is space arable space I suppose. But one of the reasons the rainforest is disappearing is to make room for more people. More business. More industry. More concrete. More blacktop.

Which are two non-helpful things when considering the ecosystem themselves. Taking away the green and replacing it with concrete and blacktop causes even more heat to be absorbed and held onto. The albedo effect I think its called...or maybe that was energy reflected back into space. Whichever lol. Neither are good things in excess.

We can do that. While there is space arable space I suppose. But one of the reasons the rainforest is disappearing is to make room for more people. More business. More industry. More concrete. More blacktop.

Which are two non-helpful things when considering the ecosystem themselves. Taking away the green and replacing it with concrete and blacktop causes even more heat to be absorbed and held onto. The albedo effect I think its called...or maybe that was energy reflected back into space. Whichever lol. Neither are good things in excess.

Thank you for the modern world that we live in dinos. Could not have done it without you.

Worst thing about the latter is that it uses a lot of fresh water, which only makes up 3% of the worlds water supply, unless you want to setup facilities to clean up sea water to drink it, which in turn needs power to operate them, and they are expensive.


In short, anyway you look at it, we're screwed because no matter what option is chosen, it steps on some ones interests and how they can make money, hence the real solution get rid of money altogether.


It's radical I know....

Kind of ironic, isn't it? Dinosaurs become extinct and give up their place as the dominant species. But-- they yield petroleum, which humans in turn use to make themselves extinct. Revenge of the dinos!

P.S. How's that for logic and critical thinking?

Very true, but the ability to grow trees at an accelerated rate is completely possible. So much of Great Britian's deforested land is still sitting treeless and unused. Forests have for eons been destoryed by nature and rebuilt by nature. Why can we not do the same thing? I am not implying that this is an easy or a quick fix, but it is the easiest thing we can do to target the biggest problem. We are not going to deccelerate our fossile fuel use, even though I believe conservation is a smart tactic to utilize.

does it have to use freshwater ... we have enough water in the sea ?

Salt water corrodes the piping used to generate the pressure needed( something crazy like 10 000 + PSI), to crack the rock and reach the deposits.

CO2 concentrarion increases as the temperature of the planet increases, not the inverse.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ice_age

Education, I was aiming to get into Geology.

There are a large number of BBC science programmes from Professor Iain Stewart that go into detail on the subject. There are also some Horizon documentaries that get into some good detail and there might be a Royal Institute Christmas Lecture on the subject but I'm not sure on that one.

The biggest problem with Climate change is that the general public has very little easy to digest info on the subject and the news sites from both sides of the camp are terrible at reporting the subject. I'm one of those rare people that enjoy reading scientific papers

Here's a good one to watch, The Climate Wars. Its a history of the climate change debate.

Episode 1

Episode 2

Episode 3

This always baffles me how people are in such denial. We are a species about 7 billion strong who all breathe and exhale carbon dioxide just as a baseline. Then a large portion of that population has their own car to drive around in and the overwhelming majority of that population gets their power from coal power plants and most of us by products made in factories that also release various chemicals into the atmosphere and we all get our food and other necessities by vast networks of various freight methods land air or sea. Of course we have an impact on our environment.

Thank you Baltec , I'll be watching those later o7