Old clocks for Eco warriors?

[Tmuir]

I'm sure where-ever you are the news is filled with climate change news articles and meeting the Paris Agreement targets and similar new articles, and it has been causing a little thought in the back of my brain to keep ticking over.

Should we be mentioning or even promoting the benefits to the climate in buying a good quality serviced vintage or antique clock?

No plastic in the clock, can be serviced and outlast the owners if looked after and probably has a wooden case so is even stores a little carbon, its wind up so no batteries to worry about.

The same can be said for a good quality vintage watch.

I'm only mentioning this half is jest but it could be mentioned as another positive reason to invest in a vintage clock.

I've only ever owned 1 quartz clock and that was something I was given as a wedding present that wasn't on the gift list, I was very pleased when a couple of years later the hook it was on gave way and the clock smashed on the ground which gave me my excuse to tell my wife we needed a good English Fusee wall clock.

[yankeedog]

Hmmmmm....carbon emissions...have you ever  looked at a graph  of carbon emissions  since 1750?

      Conversely have you ever looked  at a graph  of human  population  since  1750?

      The curves are eerily  similar. Could  it be that  these  emissions  are driving the population  up? More carbon dioxide, more photosynthesis ,More food, More people. Less carbon dioxide,less photosynthesis, Less food, Less people.

        The Earth's  population  was relatively  flat until  we started  burning  coal. Are we polluting  the  Earth, or fertilizing  it?

[JBerry]

23 minutes ago, yankeedog said:

Hmmmmm....carbon emissions...have you ever  looked at a graph  of carbon emissions  since 1750?

      Conversely have you ever looked  at a graph  of human  population  since  1750?

      The curves are eerily  similar. Could  it be that  these  emissions  are driving the population  up? More carbon dioxide, more photosynthesis ,More food, More people. Less carbon dioxide,less photosynthesis, Less food, Less people.

        The Earth's  population  was relatively  flat until  we started  burning  coal. Are we polluting  the  Earth, or fertilizing  it?

Increasing industrialization (resulting in increasing emissions) has allowed much more productive agriculture, which has allowed us to support ever growing populations

[vinn3]

2 hours ago, Tmuir said:

I'm sure where-ever you are the news is filled with climate change news articles and meeting the Paris Agreement targets and similar new articles, and it has been causing a little thought in the back of my brain to keep ticking over.

Should we be mentioning or even promoting the benefits to the climate in buying a good quality serviced vintage or antique clock?

No plastic in the clock, can be serviced and outlast the owners if looked after and probably has a wooden case so is even stores a little carbon, its wind up so no batteries to worry about.

The same can be said for a good quality vintage watch.

I'm only mentioning this half is jest but it could be mentioned as another positive reason to invest in a vintage clock.

I've only ever owned 1 quartz clock and that was something I was given as a wedding present that wasn't on the gift list, I was very pleased when a couple of years later the hook it was on gave way and the clock smashed on the ground which gave me my excuse to tell my wife we needed a good English Fusee wall clock.

   the plastic, quartz clocks  burn good too.  vin

[AndyHull]

There is a strange paradox with plastic. Yes, it is completely non-biodegradable, but by the same token, it locks up carbon pretty much forever. You don't want to be burning oil, coal or natural gas to make energy, but making plastic is another matter.

The issue with plastics is more to do with the fact that we re-cycle far too little of it, and thus our environment is heavily contaminated with it. 

The same is true of pretty much all of the "ingredients" in our consumer goods. They are typically produced to a price, and engineered to fail. This is of course the madness of infinite growth Laissez-faire Capitalsim. The trouble starts when you try to address this, as the moment you challenge the near religious fervor that surrounds capitalism, people scream nonsense about Communism, and "you must be some kind of communist",  as if it is the only alternative. Leave aside the 'isms' and address environmental matters in a more scientific manner and you will find solutions. 

As to using a mechanical watch or clock. They are actually a brilliant example of good engineering. A well built, well maintained mechanical timepiece will keep going pretty much forever, and use zero additional carbon over its lifetime.

Compare this with an "Apple Watch *"  These products are designed with a fixed lifespan. Generally they are not maintainable in any meaningful sense, and their use of energy (and thus carbon) is many orders of magnitude higher than a comparable mechanical watch.  

Should we therefore be encouraging everyone to wear a mechanical watch?

Of course, after all I have cornered the market in sub £4.04 mechanical timepieces, and my Capitalist senses see a boom in the market if we do. I'll be rich I tell you  $$$ RICH $$$ 

(*other hideously over hyped and over priced brands are available)

Edited February 23, 2020 by AndyHull

[yankeedog]

Yes, agreed plastics are a problem, while at the same time being a solutions to other problems.Hence the paradox.But I see the same thing with carbon emissions.We are releasing carbon that has been locked up in the earth for eons .This carbon fuels life.Human life.Of course this is only my theory, which all are welcome to refute.If I am right ,a serious reduction in carbon emissions will result in a reduction in food production.which will result in famine .As for mechanical watches.given proper service they can last almost as long as that milk jug out in the middle of the Atlantic.