Genetic predisposition is likely also involved here? Why would Singaporeans develop same or higher levels of visceral fat than americans that are more obese than them?
We don't use gas much for heating in northern Europe. At least not in Scandinavia, Iceland and Finland (Maybe Denmark is a small exception). Norway is also Europe's biggest gas exporter.
I don't think gas heating is noticeably cheaper than heat pumps, but smaller upfront costs.
As the current situation is I dont see why we shouldnt join the EU. We are better at adopting EU directives than most EU members. And we still end up having to adopt the horrible ones anyway, so might as well at least have an influence on the decisions that are made.
Yeah, I'm Danish but grew up in Norway, it's almost interchangeable. A few harder sounds in Norwegian, so change a few g's to k's etc. And Danish for some reason just litters commas randomly in a sentence, so just remove half of them randomly. And then remember the different meaning of "må" (NO=must, DK=may) when writing your manual, and you're good to go!
In Norwegian, “kan” may mean either “can” or “may” depending on context. That’s a source of confusion sometimes. Not sure about Danish, but I don’t think it can mean “must”.
In Norway, when I (24) went to kindergarten my dad used to call to tell them to let me out the gate when it was time for me to go home. When I started at school I got walked only the couple of first times so that I would learn the way. After that you would most commonly walk alone or with classmates and friends who lived close to you.
As a Norwegian I would say something that is a big trait of Norwegian/Scandinavian culture that seperates it from many other parts of the world other than being very high trust societies, is independency. Young people get very independent at a young age. And parents don't meddle in their lives to the same extent as in many other countries. Politics also enables this by giving grants and loans to students, which makes the majority of people economically independent from their parents at 18/19.
> Politics also enables this by giving grants and loans to students, which makes the majority of people economically independent from their parents at 18/19.
Can you elaborate on these grants and loans? What are they for? When do they start?
Whereas higher education is free in most of europe, you are still usually reliant on getting sent money from your parents to finance your living expenses. In Scandinavia you are not dependant on having parents with money to pursue higher education.
If you get accepted to a University, you apply and you'll get equivalent of 13-14k usd every year of study to cover living expenses.
Up to 40% of it gets converted to a grant, depending on how many of your classes you passed. The loan is also under very favorable conditions, interest free while studying, very low interest after finished, usually paid over 20 years, and you can postpone payment up to 36 times (3 years) whenever you want.
Another thing about the loan: My understanding (as an immigrant) is that the loan can be forgiven completely if you move, live, and work up north for a number of years.
Folks have some trouble where I am, and I have 'days' during the winter. Sure, they are 4.5 hours long in December and the sunlight is poor, but I technically have days.
That said, I'd be willing to try it for a couple of years, if anything just for the experience. Dark winters are a lot and the weather can be pretty brutal with ocean storms and wind and stuff, but I think clear winter nights would be beautiful more regularly than Trondheim.
Comparing oil to heroin is beyond stupid. It's an essential good responsible for 30% of the world's energy needs. If oil disappeared from the earth tomorrow, entire nations would grind to a halt and millions would die.
Opium does not save lives, it's a painkiller. And it is not the same at all. If millions would die if people stopped selling medical opium, I am sure you would argue it unethical to stop production of it before there was anything to replace it.
I would say a better analogy is selling alcohol to an alcoholic because you can't just cut off the supply right away because they could die from the abstinence symptoms. You need to get them off their dependency slowly. In this case, you need to decrease their dependency on oil and gas slowly and replace it with clean alternatives, which are currently way too expensive for the developing world.
Countries would literally go to war tomorrow if they lost their supply of oil and gas.
The environmental effects of stopping oil and gas production in Norway are not clear. Norway account for something like 2% of the worlds production. OPEC are already price fixing the market, and could (and propably would) easily replace Norways production. Some reports argue it will even increase emissions due to being replaced by less sustainable produciton.
The developing world is too dependent on oil and gas. Rapid degrowth in global oil and gas production would lead to mass hunger. It is only the developed world who can afford to stop using oil and gas at the moment. We have to replace the worlds energy needs with something else, before we take environmental choices to cut production. Third world countries suffer without cheap oil and gas.
I suppose that could be true. But even then they are hugely dependent on cheap energy for transportation and other parts of the value chain. You need a certain efficiency in food production to sustain huge populations like in India, Pakistan, Indonesia, Nigeria. Removing their access to cheap energy would take a huge toll on their living standard and for sure cause more people to suffer.
reply