advertisement


Climate change teaching in schools

If the curriculum is going to address this issue it should also address the economics of the global energy supply chain.
For example the energy requirements for different sectors of the economy that are required to support the current global population, such as agriculture for food production, mining and and manufacturing to provide materials for shelter.

We want our children to have a realistic understanding of the problem, not a simplistic view that we can abort fossil fuel energy overnight without a drastic impact on the capacity to maintain the lives of the current population.

Yes. We do need them to be well informed. That will only help us to get moving more effectively towards greening the UK energy provision.

BTW if people want to know about developlements I can recommend going though old issues of IEEE Spectrum mag. I get printed copies but I think they are also on the web. People may be surprised by developments under way.
 
Not sure where this 5mins comes from?

If a child is at school for approx 1200hrs a year...or 30 hrs a week ...then its approx 1hr a week
This is using typical school hours and term time in my area...
 
Again you're quibbling about details as if the government are ever going to implement this.
The engagement I was talking about is things like petitioning the government for change.
And I know it's like banging your head against a wall but if it gets above a certain level, it has to be raised in the HoC.

EDIT: There were other posts, this was in reply to ks.234 #19
 
I seem to remember being very confidently told (back in the early 70s I was at Grammer School) that well before the end of the century the oil would have run out around the world. And that were well overdue a mini ice age too. Those certainties did not turn out too well. But climate change was certainly not a thing.

Back then of course there was no clue that renewables could be developed (solar panels were back in the labs back then), wind was not thought off as suitable power source. Wave power was under discussion I discovered when I got to Uni in 1975. That has not panned out too well either (yet, at any rate).

But it seems that teaching climate change is obviously a thing for the geography syllabus to incorporate and would not need an extra teaching slot or subject created. My daughter has been doing Geog from GCSE, A Level, Degree and climate change has been there all along. She has now started a Masters in sustainable business.
 
Young generation has to learn think way way ahead. That is what climate changes also are all about. Many problems, energy included, is because we want it cheap and we want it now, and we want a lot. So any more expensive solutions gets delayed as long as possible. Covid and war finally showed how dangerous is globalization and concentration.
 
Signed but the devil is in the detail regarding implementation for sure Nat Curriculum notwithstanding.

Kids are taught about it, at least at my kids old schools, now a few years back and I agree about expanding the topic. We should consider the broader ESG as all companies I work with have this as a key objective and we need smart and keen minds coming out of education considering this for the working world as that is where real change will happen.
 
Not sure where this 5mins comes from?

If a child is at school for approx 1200hrs a year...or 30 hrs a week ...then its approx 1hr a week This is using typical school hours and term time in my area...
That is 1 hr per week across all subjects. There are between 9 and 12 subjects depending on school, so approx 5 mins for each subject.

School year is 39 weeks
 
We were taught about the possibility of climate change around O Level time when the population was under 4 Billion; i don't think anyone foresaw the massive increase in population and consumption that would ensue.

There was a lot of debate about ZPG; we seem to have forgotten that now.
 
Young people are already engaged, some too much. Do not eat meat because it is bad for environment.

It is generally accepted an ICE vehicle is not even 20% efficient???? I've just been trying to find an article relating to cow efficiency but can't put my hands on it right now, a figure of 40% seems to ring a bell.

It is far more efficient to grow crops to feed us directly rather than 'grow' cows!!

Regards

Richard
 
I didn't mean it was irrelevant to the UK.

Of course climate change is relevant to the UK, but what I meant was that no matter what we do in this country it won't make a blind bit of difference, compared to the countries myself and Gintonic mentioned
 
We knew nothing at school about this when I was at school. But of course that was in the 1960s. The first sign I saw was the "Limits of Growth" book - not really ecological in the modern sense - in the 1970s.

Nowdays, educating the young wrt the reality they may face is critical. They'll never forgive us if we don't. After all, we are lumbering them with the consequences.
 
I didn't mean it was irrelevant to the UK.

Of course climate change is relevant to the UK, but what I meant was that no matter what we do in this country it won't make a blind bit of difference, compared to the countries myself and Gintonic mentioned

Actually, it may well "make a difference" because green sources are becoming significantly cheaper and easier to build, etc. As I think I pointed out, even *before* Putin's Act of War the newer wind farms could make a profit because they were cheaper as a source than gas. Hence it is a no-brainer in economic terms to build more of them asap rather than hope gas price falls soon.

Indeed, as some countries are already finding, you can make money from building the kit for export to more, erm, backward, countries that want the cheaper energy from them that undercuts fossil and may in many cases give them more independence.

Green energy isn't a consumable. And the generators are getting ever more capable and cost effective.

SolarPV and 'tidal' are also coming along and getting more cost efficient, etc.

The real problem here is akin to Big Tabacco. The fossil companies that want you to go on smoking, and will bankroll poliicians, etc, to delay the change. The problem is no longer one of engineering. It is big companies with wealthy owners protecting their interest in toasting the planet for their profit. Mirrored by the actions of Trussonomics. cf PE.

That's another reason it needs to be taught in schools. Too important for the lives of our young to omit and leave to the Daily Mail, etc.
 
If the curriculum is going to address this issue it should also address the economics of the global energy supply chain.
For example the energy requirements for different sectors of the economy that are required to support the current global population, such as agriculture for food production, mining and and manufacturing to provide materials for shelter.

We want our children to have a realistic understanding of the problem, not a simplistic view that we can abort fossil fuel energy overnight without a drastic impact on the capacity to maintain the lives of the current population.
Jesus Christ, how much time are you hoping to put to this? I don't understand a quarter of this, and I'm a well educated, well read professional working in manufacturing!
Honestly, come on. Schoolchildren understanding the economics of the global supply chain? I can let you talk to graduates with business studies or economics degrees who know FA about this after 3 years of tertiary level study.
 
Jesus Christ, how much time are you hoping to put to this? I don't understand a quarter of this, and I'm a well educated, well read professional working in manufacturing!
Honestly, come on. Schoolchildren understanding the economics of the global supply chain? I can let you talk to graduates with business studies or economics degrees who know FA about this after 3 years of tertiary level study.

Erm... That may tell you more about the course they took or the individual student than it should. :)

The basics of Climate Change and both the climate and *economic* reasons to change are pretty simple. The details take work if you want to be an expert. But the basics are fairly simple.

And TBH a lot of the 'economics' taught are clearly dodgy when you look at what its believers think and do. 8-] Look at the muppets we are now saddled with as our 'Government' as a shining (sic) example.
 
Jesus Christ, how much time are you hoping to put to this? I don't understand a quarter of this, and I'm a well educated, well read professional working in manufacturing!
Honestly, come on. Schoolchildren understanding the economics of the global supply chain? I can let you talk to graduates with business studies or economics degrees who know FA about this after 3 years of tertiary level study.

Enough so they understand that human life depends on energy for survival, and they have an appreciation of the vast scale of the infrastructure required to supply the energy that supports the current global population. They need to have an understanding that the threat to life caused by climate change needs to be weighed against the threat to life caused by drastic disruption to the reliable availability of energy. There are no easy political decisions that will make the problem go away, because the world has far exceeded a sustainable population.
 
Enough so they understand that human life depends on energy for survival, and they have an appreciation of the vast scale of the infrastructure required to supply the energy that supports the current global population. They need to have an understanding that the threat to life caused by climate change needs to be weighed against the threat to life caused by drastic disruption to the reliable availability of energy. There are no easy political decisions that will make the problem go away, because the world has far exceeded a sustainable population.
How is a teacher supposed to be able to do all this in 5 minutes a week?
 
Enough so they understand that human life depends on energy for survival, and they have an appreciation of the vast scale of the infrastructure required to supply the energy that supports the current global population. They need to have an understanding that the threat to life caused by climate change needs to be weighed against the threat to life caused by drastic disruption to the reliable availability of energy. There are no easy political decisions that will make the problem go away, because the world has far exceeded a sustainable population.
Easy to talk about, less easy to do when large numbers of children leave school with basic maths and English. I knew what you mention above by 16, even in the 80s there was the nuclear debate, what we were going to do about oil running out and so on. I don't think that this has changed for present day kids, even if the content has moved on.
 


advertisement


Back
Top