Stories
Slash Boxes
Comments

SoylentNews is people

posted by Fnord666 on Saturday March 18 2017, @07:53PM   Printer-friendly
from the your-phone-is-ringing dept.

Discussion around limiting climate change primarily focusses on whether the best results can be gained by individuals changing how they act, or governments introducing new legislation.

Now though, University of Leeds academics Dr Rob Lawlor and Dr Helen Morley from the Inter-Disciplinary Ethics Applied Centre suggest engineering professionals could also play a pivotal role, and could provide a co-ordinated response helping to mitigate climate change.

Writing in the journal Science and Engineering Ethics, they say engineering professional institutions could take a stand in tackling climate change by developing a declaration imposing restrictions and requirements on members.

"A strong and coordinated action by the engineering profession could itself make a significant difference in how we respond to climate change," they said.

"We know many engineers and firms make great efforts to be as environmentally friendly as possible, and research is carried out and supported by the sector to help reduce its impact on the world. We're suggesting that concerted action could improve this process further."

Quoting 2014 research by Richard Heede from the Climate Accountability Institute, they say nearly two-thirds of historic carbon dioxide and methane emissions could be attributed to crude oil and natural gas producers, coal extractors, and cement producers. These are industries typically enabled by the engineering profession.

They're looking at you, VW engineers.


Original Submission

 
This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.
Display Options Threshold/Breakthrough Mark All as Read Mark All as Unread
The Fine Print: The following comments are owned by whoever posted them. We are not responsible for them in any way.
  • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @09:38PM (7 children)

    by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @09:38PM (#480942)

    What part of CO2 do you fail to understand?

  • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 18 2017, @09:47PM (6 children)

    by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 18 2017, @09:47PM (#480947) Journal

    Which part of particulates and NOx do you not understand? As already stated, the CO2 alone was enough to create a scandal. All three pollutants combined made a scandal into a helluva big scandal. It isn't JUST the CO2. Do you remember "acid rain"?

    • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:01PM (4 children)

      by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:01PM (#480949)

      OK, Runaway, you are a complete idiot, but I am intrigued by your thought process: How does the fact that diesels have lower CO2 emissions constitute a scandal? Please explain. I thought this might be right up your alley, but you are lowering my estimate of the intelligence of truck drivers.

      • (Score: 2) by Runaway1956 on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:06PM (3 children)

        by Runaway1956 (2926) Subscriber Badge on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:06PM (#480951) Journal

        WTF is hard to understand here? VW cheated on the CO2, they cheated on the NOx, they cheated on the particulates. They cheated ALL of the emissions tests. They didn't ONLY cheat on the CO2. The original post, to which I responded, suggested that it was ALL ABOUT CO2, and CO2 alone.

        If you need more information, do your own search. "Volkswagen particulate emissions" and "Volkswagen NOx emissions".

        Cheating on any one of those pollutants would have been a scandal. In this case, they took deliberate steps to hide the extent of each of those pollutants.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:30PM

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:30PM (#480956)

          VW cheated on the CO2

          The link you provided does not assert that VW deliberately tried to cheat CO2 emissions standards. All it says is that diesel was attractive to auto manufacturers because burning diesel produces less CO2 than burning gasoline per mile.

        • (Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:39PM (1 child)

          by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:39PM (#480960)

          WTF is hard to understand here?

          It is hard to understand why you keep saying things that are not true. Are you Donald Trump?

          • (Score: -1, Flamebait) by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:46PM

            by Anonymous Coward on Saturday March 18 2017, @10:46PM (#480962)

            It is hard to understand why you keep saying things that are not true.

            Its the only way he can masturbate any more.
            He puts on a burka, spouts bullshit, fingers his asshole and makes a mess on his keyboard.

    • (Score: 2) by NotSanguine on Sunday March 19 2017, @03:09AM

      Which part of particulates and NOx do you not understand? As already stated, the CO2 alone was enough to create a scandal. All three pollutants combined made a scandal into a helluva big scandal. It isn't JUST the CO2. Do you remember "acid rain"?

      Acid fog [wikipedia.org] was even worse.

      --
      No, no, you're not thinking; you're just being logical. --Niels Bohr