dantheman
Bah humbug
More Twitchers?
-
Welcome to BirdForum, the internet's largest birding community with thousands of members from all over the world. The forums are dedicated to wild birds, birding, binoculars and equipment and all that goes with it.
Please register for an account to take part in the discussions in the forum, post your pictures in the gallery and more.
Twitching and your carbon footprint. (1 Viewer)
- Thread starter Mannix
- Start date
More Twitchers?
POP
Registered User
You are quite right compare today's number of birders chasing after birds (which I have nothing against) to the 70s,the so called footprint represents an elephant now to a dormouse then.
POP
ColinD
Well-known member
And we didn't have carbon footprints back then..
tittletattler
Well-known member
I like this post alot although I don't think you needed the bold capitals at the end; most intelligent people would have worked that out for themselves.
Still, the plus side is that the high prices will lead to less reliance on petrol in the medium to long term.
tittletattler
Well-known member
tittletattler
Well-known member
Godammit.....and this one!
Once hitched to North Ron for a Pallas's Grotfinch, back down to Pagham for a Terek Sand and then hitched down to Porthgwarra to tick Cory's. Good ole days.
tittletattler
Well-known member
OUR GOVERNMENT NEEDS TO START A MASSIVE BREEDING PROGRAM RIGHT NOW!!
Sorted
And this one. But for different reasons.
Any more suggestions like this, and I'll force you to look at more Casps on Littlebrook again.
POP
Registered User
DunnoKev
Guest
My experiences of Fulmar ringing show they have rather catholic tastes when it comes to food. If you flush it down a loo, and it gets discharged at sea they'll eat it.
Having had the odd phrophylactic or two coughed up into my lap over the years I'd say c'mon everyone feed a fulmar and save the planet from overpopulation..
DunnoKev
- - - - - -
Reference: "Dietrary analysis of man-made additives found in Northern Fulmar Fulmaris glacialis colony at Flanborough Bottom, Suppressex", A.Summers
dantheman
Bah humbug
And this one. But for different reasons.
Any more suggestions like this, and I'll force you to look at more Casps on Littlebrook again.
Someone seems quite amenable this evening. :t: I guess it's that chilled reputation to uphold . . .
I had thought they'd filled it in ... looks like it's just smaller now... So it will still get the Caspo's do you reckon then? Not sure I'm ready for that yet. (I did think I might have seen a dodgy possible on the Thames the other day though . . )
Gotta watch my carbon footprint now . . . being all that distance away in Swanley now :eek!:
Last edited:
dantheman
Bah humbug
Maybe we could refer to the aforementioned tabloid press to find the most appropriate demographic group to experiment with alternative fulmar food sources to wean them onto to. It'd also be making a good start on the overpopulation issue as well . . .
How about starting with Politicians and Oil Future Speculators then ??
Terry,
Hmmmm, there WAS a bit of 'backroom' (insider & profoundly illegal) dealing in the 'Silverfinger' scenario that you refer to. If I remember correctly, I believe that some of those 'New regulations' that 'were imposed'...were later found to be BLATANTLY contrary to US policy, Fair Trade Act, the US Constitution,...etc. (ad nauseam). I am TRUE red, white & blue...but couldn't you maybe cite a better example. This one REEKS!
Respectfully,
Ron Davidson
StrikingSlug
As in "Speed of a Striking Slug"
Who needs Fulmars when you've got bugs?
Check this out...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece
Richard
Check this out...
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/environment/article4133668.ece
Richard
Richard,
Thanks for the link. Now those who want to twitch can do so...and, if they are from the USA, they can do so realizing that their carbon footprint of the 'bug produced fuel' that they use for twitching is only a small portion of the 205 sq. miles (that it would take to produce the total USA consumer demand for fuel). Maybe soon that 205 sq. miles would be greatly reduced. Things ARE looking up for twitchers. Best Wishes.:t:
Ron
my oppinion ?
i know sometimes you have to go a long way to see what you want but wouldnt it be best that if something is within a reasonable walking distance then shouldnt you do the right thing and walk.
as for using cars, im sure that with all the cars in the world people arnt going to stop using them anytime soon so the altenative would be to use eco friendly fuel and things like that
and also im sorry if anything i have just said has already been covered
Michelle xx
i know sometimes you have to go a long way to see what you want but wouldnt it be best that if something is within a reasonable walking distance then shouldnt you do the right thing and walk.
as for using cars, im sure that with all the cars in the world people arnt going to stop using them anytime soon so the altenative would be to use eco friendly fuel and things like that
and also im sorry if anything i have just said has already been covered
Michelle xx
tittletattler
Well-known member
)
Hi Michelle,
I also read last week that driving at 50-60 mph reduces petrol use by 34% whe compared to miles per gallon achieved at 80-90mph.
I'll now drive slower on my way back from twitches.
Hi Michelle,
I also read last week that driving at 50-60 mph reduces petrol use by 34% whe compared to miles per gallon achieved at 80-90mph.
I'll now drive slower on my way back from twitches.
John P
Usually on a different wavelength
What I want to know......
I went off to Sussex today to see a Red-backed Shrike, (a lifer for both myself and the wife), a round trip of 165 miles including a few intended detours.
The latest incarnation of the Multimap website gives an idea of the carbon footprint for any given journey. For this trip it was 30 Kilos for a large diesel car.
Fuel consumption during the trip was 49.8mpg, so, just over three gallons of diesel with a weight of 30lb, how can 30lb of fuel emit 30 kilos of carbon?
Pic of shrike
I went off to Sussex today to see a Red-backed Shrike, (a lifer for both myself and the wife), a round trip of 165 miles including a few intended detours.
The latest incarnation of the Multimap website gives an idea of the carbon footprint for any given journey. For this trip it was 30 Kilos for a large diesel car.
Fuel consumption during the trip was 49.8mpg, so, just over three gallons of diesel with a weight of 30lb, how can 30lb of fuel emit 30 kilos of carbon?
Pic of shrike
Attachments
dantheman
Bah humbug
My guess would be 30lbs of pure (ish) carbon + twice that much oxygen (the di-oxide bit of the CO2 . . .) = considerably more than 30lbs (unless oxygen weighs zero lbs, unlikly I guess)
2 bits of Oxygen have been taken out of the atmosphere, then churned out with a bit of Carbon attached.
I'm wondering how much space (volume) that takes up though in the atmosphere though, as it seem sa bit awkward to think of gases in terms of weight . . . . (ie a balloon full of air weighs almost next to nothing)
Am I on the right lines???
EDIT: Unless maybe I'm talking about the Carbon Dioxide footprint???
2nd EDIT: Or just a load of hot air??
2 bits of Oxygen have been taken out of the atmosphere, then churned out with a bit of Carbon attached.
I'm wondering how much space (volume) that takes up though in the atmosphere though, as it seem sa bit awkward to think of gases in terms of weight . . . . (ie a balloon full of air weighs almost next to nothing)
Am I on the right lines???
EDIT: Unless maybe I'm talking about the Carbon Dioxide footprint???
2nd EDIT: Or just a load of hot air??
Last edited:
The math sure does look a bit off. Maybe that's also taking into account the carbon footprint of extracting, refining, shipping and distributing (pumping at the pump) the fuel...in addition to the carbon footprint of all the equipment produced to do all of the above...in addition to the carbon footprint of all the road construction...in addition to the carbon footprint of all the maintenance for all of the above...etc, etc, (averaged out to a 'carbon footprint unit per mile' multiplied by the number of miles driven). There definitely would be 'hidden carbon footprint values' that WOULD need to be taken into account, but...then again, it could just be bad math.
Then of course there is THIS (quoted and paraphrased from several sources on the internet, including press releases from TATA Motors):
The Compressed Air Car
developed by Motor Development International (MDI) founder Guy Negre. The $12,700 CityCat, one of the planned AirCar models can hit 68 mph and has a range of 125 miles. It is reported to take only a few minutes and about $2.00 USD to fill up the car with 340 liters of fresh air at gas stations equipped with custom air compressor units,...or about 4 hours to fill up when electrically plugged in at one's home or office. India's TATA Motors is planning on starting production of the AirCar relatively soon.
As I mentioned in an earlier post, I DO believe that we will find a way to reduce our impact on our fragile home (EARTH). There IS hope for twitchers (I am not a twitcher, but I sometimes do some twitching...'Mannix, I am still trying to keep this thread on topic'). Best Wishes To All. :t:
Ron
Last edited:
