Green Living

Mostly Cloudy with Showers 11° London Hi 14°C / Lo 8°C

Just 96 months to save world, says Prince Charles

The price of capitalism and consumerism is just too high, he tells industrialists

By Robert Verkaik

Capitalism and consumerism have brought the world to the brink of economic and environmental collapse, the Prince of Wales has warned in a grandstand speech which set out his concerns for the future of the planet.

The heir to the throne told an audience of industrialists and environmentalists at St James's Palace last night that he had calculated that we have just 96 months left to save the world.

And in a searing indictment on capitalist society, Charles said we can no longer afford consumerism and that the "age of convenience" was over.

The Prince, who has spoken passionately about the environment before, said that if the world failed to heed his warnings then we all faced the "nightmare that for so many of us now looms on the horizon".

Charles's speech was described as his first attempt to present a coherent philosophy in which he placed the threat to the environment in the context of a failing economic system.

The Prince, who is advised by the leading environmentalists Jonathon Porritt and Tony Juniper, said that even the economist Adam Smith, father of modern capitalism, had been aware of the short-comings of unfettered materialism.

Delivering the annual Richard Dimbleby lecture, Charles said that without "coherent financial incentives and disincentives" we have just 96 months to avert "irretrievable climate and ecosystem collapse, and all that goes with it."

Charles has recently courted controversy by intervening in planning disputes, most notably the battle over the Chelsea Barracks design in London. It is also known that he writes privately to ministers when he wishes to put his concerns on record.

Now, he seems more willing to embrace much wider political issues in a much more public forum.

He confided last night: "We face the dual challenges of a world view and an economic system that seem to have enormous shortcomings, together with an environmental crisis – including that of climate change – which threatens to engulf us all."

Despite his attack on the materialism of the modern age, the Prince has been criticised for his own indulgences, including dozens of staff to run his homes and hundreds of thousands of pounds spent travelling around the world. While his private estates on the Duchy of Cornwall generate record profits his tax bill was lower than the year before.

Last night the Prince said: "But for all its achievements, our consumerist society comes at an enormous cost to the Earth and we must face up to the fact that the Earth cannot afford to support it. Just as our banking sector is struggling with its debts – and paradoxically also facing calls for a return to so-called 'old-fashioned', traditional banking – so Nature's life-support systems are failing to cope with the debts we have built up there too.

"If we don't face up to this, then Nature, the biggest bank of all, could go bust. And no amount of quantitative easing will revive it."

Post a Comment

View all comments that have been posted about this article.

Offensive or abusive comments will be removed and your IP logged and may be used to prevent further submission. In submitting a comment to the site, you agree to be bound by the Independent Minds Terms of Service.

Comments

Page 1 of 9
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] >>
Tic Tac Prince
[info]janson2009 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 12:57 am (UTC)
March 2009: In a keynote speech in Brazil, Prince Charles warned "We have less than 100 months (8 years) to save Earth"
April 2009: At the launch of the Red Squirrel Survival Trust, Prince Charles warned that the red squirrel could be extinct in the UK within ten years.
If we have only 8 years-according to Charles in his speach about global warming-than squirrels will outlive us!!!
Who writes these speechs for him?! His worst enemy? Gosh! Prince Charles needs math lessons! The guy is dumb!
Re: Tic Tac Prince
[info]phrage wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 01:05 am (UTC)
your simplistic read of his statements is silly. he is not saying the world will explode in 8 years -merely that the opportunity to arrest the destruction spiral will end in that period
Re: Tic Tac Prince - [info]cpg62 - Saturday, 11 July 2009 at 01:15 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Tic Tac Prince - [info]w1551ns - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:33 pm (UTC) Expand
Prince Charles's environmentalism
[info]daleaway wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 01:24 am (UTC)
I look forward to Charles walking the walk as well as talking the talk. It would do a lot for his credibility.
[info]santinox wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 01:34 am (UTC)
Easy to grandstand from a priveleged position...
The end is here.
[info]johnnywi wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 02:29 am (UTC)
Let Charles live in a hut and give up his cars and planes. He has to be one of the dumbest men on the planet. Global warming is a hoax. The earth has been cooling for the last 8 years. 31000 scientists have signed a petition saying there isn't significant global warming. Me: I am going to keep driving my 2 Lexus.
Re: The end is here.
[info]razygentry wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 04:01 am (UTC)

Lexi
Re: The end is here. - [info]andre_t - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:10 am (UTC) Expand
Re: The end is here. - [info]wifitekman - Friday, 10 July 2009 at 06:06 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: The end is here. - [info]senor_ping_pong - Friday, 10 July 2009 at 09:45 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: The end is here. - [info]herrlaurence - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 09:10 am (UTC) Expand
Re: The end is here. - [info]ducapaduca - Friday, 10 July 2009 at 07:49 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: The end is here. - [info]shortgus - Friday, 10 July 2009 at 11:30 pm (UTC) Expand
Avant Garde
[info]toroviolet wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 02:37 am (UTC)
Have you seen or heard any other Royals around the world to talk against the establishment or side effects of capitalism?
Leaders are not the same as followers
[info]mounty1 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 03:24 am (UTC)
It's ridiculous to expect Charles to live at the median line. He is heir to the British throne and needs a staff and resources to carry out that role, just as Gordon Brown, Barack Obama etc. do. He is not, like the majority of us, just keeping himself and his family alive.
Re: Leaders are not the same as followers
[info]vgnwtch wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 06:40 pm (UTC)
You're absolutely correct. It's one of the very good reasons for not having a monarchy. Let's face it, tourists don't come here expecting to see the Windsors, they come here to trace ancestors, visit places of historical significance, and so on. If the Windsors became private citizens, they'd retain all the social, financial, and political clout their family have hoarded up over the years, and would do extremely well for themselves, and we'd save money on their employees, properties, and security, etc. We could open up the enormous houses we already pay for and insure, thereby retaining many in employment, and make money from them. And we wouldn't need to replace them with anything - just make the appointment of ambassadors the job of a cross-party committee instead of a government appointment in order to ensure independence.

If we're stuck with the death throes of a dysfunctional economic and political system, there's no point in throwing good money after bad.
Re: Leaders are not the same as followers - [info]w1551ns - Sunday, 9 August 2009 at 11:33 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Leaders are not the same as followers - [info]living_fossil - Saturday, 11 July 2009 at 07:12 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Leaders are not the same as followers - [info]alfredhussein - Monday, 13 July 2009 at 08:38 pm (UTC) Expand
Charles and the Pope
[info]alexweir1949 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:06 am (UTC)
Charles and the Pope

Charles and the Pope are both speaking out about the concept that possibly the train we are on and the track we are on are not heading for the correct destination, or are going we wrong route to get to that destination. The fact that neither has a balance or truly coherent strategy is unfortunate but not fatal - at least they know that something is wrong - that is more than all the World Leaders know - they are busy trying to get the same train back on the same track. Of course the rich in rich countries have a patrician view of what the future world order should be. But at least they are thinking and talking - do not deride them - extend the debate.

Mr Alex Weir, Gaborone and Harare
Re: Charles and the Pope
[info]falanf wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:49 am (UTC)
The key to all the "Save the Earth" crusades is that there are simply too many people for planet Earth to sustain. Let the Pope seriously address that point and he might be worth listening to. As for Charles, the man who seems to be more interested in the under-population of red squirrels than the over-population of his fellow humans, he would is more useful as a comedian. And he is going to be King - what a joke!
Re: Charles and the Pope - [info]hoody_youth - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 11:55 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Charles and the Pope - [info]w1551ns - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:39 pm (UTC) Expand
Hysterical Warmist Fits
[info]adam_z wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:22 am (UTC)
I have never read such a load of hyperventilating, hysterical garbage. I think the warmists are realising that they are wrong, so they are forced into hysterical foamy mouthed fits.
Re: Hysterical Warmist Fits
[info]gobacktosleep1 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 02:28 pm (UTC)
Can't say he looked too hysterical when giving the speech, certainly no foaming mouth.
Pull the other one
[info]rogersbrother wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 05:34 am (UTC)
And what qualifications, knowledge or experience of anything (other than a lifetime of parasitism) does Charles Windsor have in order to make his pronouncements?

Stripped of his inherited wealth and titles this intellectually third rate adulterous dick head would be lucky to find a job of any kind let alone lecture the rest of us. Even the vomit inducing Bono and the equally odious Bob Geldof earned their own money before embarking in their self congratulatory posturing imbecility.


Re: Pull the other one
[info]mollerade wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:39 am (UTC)
I'm shocked to hear others like you take such an aggressive personal hatred of HRH, infering a complete disagreement of what was said too. Now i'm no lover of HRH, i happened to catch the speach, and although its delivery was very dry, it was a good speach, with good detailed arguments.

In reference to HRH finding a job, as an employer, i'd rather hire someone who is willing to stand up and speak than someone like you who seems to take a general dislike to anyone pointing out what is increasingly an abvious and ugly truth. We cannot continue to grow and consume the earth resources at the rate we are doing so, unless we are prepared to sacrifice our future. But perhaps that is it. Perhaps people like you don't care about anyone else. All you care about is yourself, and since the earth has enough resources to see you through to the end of YOUR life, you would rather not be reminded of the devilish ignorance you continue to pursue.
Re: Pull the other one - [info]rogersbrother - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:10 am (UTC) Expand
Re: Pull the other one - [info]mollerade - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 09:22 am (UTC) Expand
Just 96 months to save world, says Charles
[info]famulla wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 06:10 am (UTC)
MAMA I wannnaaaa get marrried now now now now and produce my tree
I thank you
Firozali A Mulla
Never say never again
[info]over325one wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 06:12 am (UTC)
Why is he not protesting at the extending of the M25? We all know that more roads = more traffic but our new minister for transport from Tooting says otherwise. How on earth did this Tooting Twit get the job. We are all on the road to nowhere!
Re: Never say never again
[info]mollerade wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:46 am (UTC)
oofff.. yes you got him their, wow mentioning the M25 expansion would have been much more of an important message, than radically changing our taxation to favour renewable raw materials, re-focus globalization at the local community level, and pay other nations with resouces, billions if not trillions to keep forests in place. Yes.. Yes.. the M25 would have been much more important.
8 years * five 40 kids
[info]famulla wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 06:21 am (UTC)
Just 96 months to save world, says Charles
The Total is 40 kids before you die die die die die die die buried buried buried burnt given to crows eagles tuna whales etc hELP help moma moma
Firozali A.Mulla
Re: 8 years * five 40 kids
[info]whiterabbi7 wrote:
Friday, 10 July 2009 at 11:38 pm (UTC)
Firozali, you do realise that you make no sense? Ever.
Re: 8 years * five 40 kids - [info]famulla - Saturday, 11 July 2009 at 03:16 am (UTC) Expand
Sanctimonious hypocrite
[info]ultraskeptic wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 06:30 am (UTC)
The idea that this half-witted parasite will be head of state in this country is more worrying than the weekly apocalypse warnings from the global warming racketeers. The Queen should be the last monarch we have . But there are enough grovelling brown-nosed sycophants to ensure that she won't be, unfortunately.
Guy Fawkes may still have a point
[info]drlizmiller wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 06:47 am (UTC)
Well done Charles! - more sense than we have heard from a parliament of fishwives* in many a year. Perhaps we should have another go at blowing up the Houses Of Parliament and replace it with Royalty!

*Apologies to all real fish reading this
Re: Guy Fawkes may still have a point
[info]patrickjx wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 09:54 am (UTC)
Minions... Is it a blatant case of sycophancy? It is excruciating to read the desperate attempts to justify the parasitic/hypocritical behaviour of this guy. Prince Charles reminds me of Kim Jong-il and his flunkeys.
[info]cm999 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:13 am (UTC)
Typical hypocrisy from the next king. Will he be giving up some of his homes, private jets, numerous cars and environmentally damaging agribusiness interest. Once again just like that smug idiot Bono he going down the do as I say not as I do line again.
Pointing fingers
[info]astrid_h wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:32 am (UTC)
He can probably do better. At least he is trying. It is so easy to point that finger.
A man well ahead of his time
[info]astrid_h wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:15 am (UTC)
Grand speech of a grand man, well ahead of his time, as is clearly proven again and again by some of the infantile comments posted here.
Has any of you daring to call him names read ANYTHING scientific about climate change? Certainly not, because I have and I know prince Charles' speech to be entirely truthful. He at least is up to date on the challenges that face us.
If the IPCC's report is too long and difficult a read, then read the warning 1500 scientists from all over the world have sent out in 1992 (!!!!): http://www.worldtrans.org/whole/warning.html.
I wonder what's there to be misunderstood, or challenged.
Re: A man well ahead of his time
[info]mollerade wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:49 am (UTC)
agreed. Its heartbreaking to see so many negative comments, makes me wonder if humanity is worth saving.
Re: A man well ahead of his time - [info]astrid_h - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:21 am (UTC) Expand
Re: A man well ahead of his time - [info]john_levett - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 12:19 pm (UTC) Expand
Re: A man well ahead of his time - [info]astrid_h - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 01:24 pm (UTC) Expand
Prince Charles on the environment
[info]peteuk66 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:16 am (UTC)
I agree with HRH that we need to change our behaviour from one of consumerism to one of economising and frugality. However I do question if HRH is the right spokesman with his massive carbon footprint
When Charles speaks
[info]rhinocircus wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:21 am (UTC)
He has headlines and is heard, for saying the obvious--but if you are a prole, suffering the early effects of capitalism's destructive ideology--you are an invisible casualty.

The contradictions in Charles' life style are duly pointed out and they make hollow, the earnestness with which he speaks.

I'm afraid he will always be like the "Curate's Egg", since he is part of the profligate elite, who seem to justify their actions by speaking out against the same actions of others.

Despite this--and the fact that, he will be amongst those least affected by the looming disasters--it is good that he speaks out, if only to show his awareness of what the populace faces.
Good as far as it goes, but ...
[info]tallise wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:24 am (UTC)
... until he and all those who care about the environment (and a lot don't) grasp the nettle of world over-population, this is fiddling while Rome burns.
Re: Good as far as it goes, but ...
[info]mollerade wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:57 am (UTC)
not true, both are important, and one might not happen with out the other. Driving the cost of living in the western world has had some important effects. 1) western countries population growth is stalling 2) the ability to conceive naturally has begun to drop, with more couples needing IVF

I agree that over population is our biggest problem, but you've few choices
1) tax second children globally for 200 years, thereby reducing the population
2) er... i'm out of choices

But still what do you do when most of your population is old? Remove retirement enitrely and work until you drop?
Re: Good as far as it goes, but ... - [info]tallise - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:37 am (UTC) Expand
[info]someone456 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:25 am (UTC)
...says a homeopathy proponent.

(not that I think global warming is not a real issue, it's just that Charles doesn't come out as a person to believe on any subject, considering his stated beliefs and support of quackery)
[info]astrid_h wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:29 am (UTC)
Ever read anything about homeopathy? Anything serious, that is? A book by Samuel Hahnemann, the founder of homeopathy, maybe ? Nope, probably not. The ones who protest the loudest usually never have.

Ever read anything about global warming then? Well, obviously not either. It's not a religion, it's a scientific fact. Read the IPCC report. Read. Inform yourself properly. And then come back to us with an interesting comment when you have.

And show some respect. There's a lot of basic human respect missing here.
(no subject) - [info]colinru - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 10:46 am (UTC) Expand
When truth stares us in the face - [info]astrid_h - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 01:13 pm (UTC) Expand
(no subject) - [info]derekcolman - Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 11:36 pm (UTC) Expand
Well said Prince Charles
[info]humble_sparrow wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:28 am (UTC)
He said it all ! :-)
Good for Prince Charles
[info]errol888flynn wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:51 am (UTC)
Sad (although predictable) to see people posting cynical and childish comments, rubbishing Prince Charles' noble efforts.

As regards his prognosis? Take heed ... or you, your loved ones, and the very culture that sustained & gave you your identity will all perish following a final blow-out filled with unmitigated chaos and mayhem.

Waiting for law & order to break down before finally growing up is a very unwise proposition.
frightening.
[info]darryn87 wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 07:56 am (UTC)
prince charles is a frightening individual. super wealthy, he sits atop society, and doesn't want anyone else to sit beside him. he is a fan of the islamic world because he likes the way many islamic states are governed....by a small elite, just like britain back in the 19th century and before. he, like many in his social circle, want a return to a kind of theocracy in which the lives of each individual is determined by laws created not by the democratic will of the citizens of a sovereign nation-state, but by him and his cabal of the so-called enlightened. those who "think they klnow best." goodbye democracy.
Ants: fall in, three ranks...
[info]henrylloydmoon wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:07 am (UTC)
The way some of you react to a message delivered by someone in a higher social bracket than yourselves is frankly cause for despair. If you meet every issue in life with such a reactionary response, it's no wonder your brain hasn't got time to engage with the problem in hand. No doubt you'd sideline this royal imposter and go with a proven go-getter and self-made man like Bernie Ecclestone, who, with his legendary concern for the environment and admiration for sundry dictators, would be sure cut a swathe through the rainforest of doubting Thomases, decimating the world population in the process and providing a better future for us all. Eh? Oh...
So let's enjoy the next eight years.
[info]ptstroud wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 08:08 am (UTC)
Eight years to save the planet. On what scientific work is this prediction based? It is certainly not the warmist UN IPCC, but it might be our old friend James Hansen. This statement is as stupid as another I heard from some greenie woman on the Today programme. She claimed that we 'could' reach a temperature tipping point in five to seven years. Again no scientific evidence just a wild verbal gesture so loved by the BBC. Every global temperature data set shows that there has been no warming for ten years and that now there is a slight downward trend. Yet carbon dioxide levels have increased year on year. Yet these alarmists are now saying that this could change into a sudden catastrophic exponential rise in global temperature. In which case we might as well enjoy a few years of eco extravagance because if they happen to be right, we can certainly do nothing about it. We can expect loads of these sorts of alarmist utterances as we come up to the climate change conference in December when the son of Kyoto will be signed. But will this treaty be signed by the world's largest emitter, China?
Re: So let's enjoy the next eight years.
[info]mollerade wrote:
Thursday, 9 July 2009 at 09:44 am (UTC)
I understand your frustration that currently data isn't supporting a link between Co2 and climate change.. wait.. what? Melting Sea Ice in the poles will cool the oceans, but when that ice has gone? ..thats just off the top of my head. But no lets ignore the doom and gloom because humans have never been able to rise to a challenge, never been able to adapt to their environment, never been able to learn from mistakes, never.. oh you get the point.. right?
Re: So let's enjoy the next eight years. - [info]packmanv2 - Friday, 10 July 2009 at 02:46 pm (UTC) Expand
Page 1 of 9
<<[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] >>

Article Archive

Day In a Page

Sun | Mon | Tue | Wed | Thu | Fri | Sat

Select date