Author Topic: Climate Change  (Read 28709 times)

0 Members and 3 Guests are viewing this topic.

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #150 on: November 01, 2018, 02:16:08 pm »
What does one have to do with the other? There are lots of real environmental issues that we can actually do something about but the chattering classes can't stop talking about CO2 and pushing policies that waste resources and accomplish nothing remotely useful. Meanwhile the real environmental issues fall by the way side.

Not by my way side.  But the notion that the climate isn't changing as a result of human activity is as ridiculous as one that says humans aren't putting plastic in the oceans.

I'm on the same page as you when it comes to vacuous virtue signalling but doesn't mean I don't see us seriously regretting our failure to do something worthwhile about the issue in a few decades time.
Agree Agree x 1 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #151 on: November 01, 2018, 02:29:30 pm »
I'm on the same page as you when it comes to vacuous virtue signalling but doesn't mean I don't see us seriously regretting our failure to do something worthwhile about the issue in a few decades time.
CO2 reduction policies are futile no matter how much you may wish otherwise. Adaptation is what we will be forced to do. I will certainly will have no regrets when we end up following the only rational path open to us.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline ?Impact

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2941
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #152 on: November 01, 2018, 02:32:50 pm »
Adaptation is what we will be forced to do.

When I was a child, we adapted to the polluted St. Lawrence river around Montreal by staying far away from it. Today however we swim in its waters, and new beaches are opening up.

No, adaption is not the way. Solving the problems with pollution is the only solution.

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #153 on: November 01, 2018, 02:41:47 pm »
CO2 reduction policies are futile no matter how much you may wish otherwise. Adaptation is what we will be forced to do. I will certainly will have no regrets when we end up following the only rational path open to us.

I know they are.  I don't wish anything other than that those who purport to lead us had actually done so years ago when we had a chance.

Your regrets are your own, of course.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #154 on: November 01, 2018, 02:43:22 pm »
When I was a child, we adapted to the polluted St. Lawrence river around Montreal by staying far away from it. Today however we swim in its waters, and new beaches are opening up.

No, adaption is not the way. Solving the problems with pollution is the only solution.

Yeah, it's a shame we're not going to...
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #155 on: November 01, 2018, 02:51:40 pm »
When I was a child, we adapted to the polluted St. Lawrence river around Montreal by staying far away from it. Today however we swim in its waters, and new beaches are opening up.

No, adaption is not the way. Solving the problems with pollution is the only solution.

Yeah I somehow don't really see Florida residents for instance happily preparing to pack up and head north as the ocean level rises to flood their properties.

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #156 on: November 01, 2018, 02:59:57 pm »
When I was a child, we adapted to the polluted St. Lawrence river around Montreal by staying far away from it. Today however we swim in its waters, and new beaches are opening up.
The difference is there was something that could be done about polluted waters. No such option exists for CO2 because viable alternatives do not exist. It is all expensive and pointless virtue signalling.

Offline Squidward von Squidderson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5630
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #157 on: November 05, 2018, 05:44:53 pm »
This article perfectly describes posters here....    since denying climate change is occuring makes you look like an uneducated idiot, these people have changed to denying the solutions.  Same climate deniers, different tactic.

Quote
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/business/commentary/article-denying-solutions-is-the-new-climate-change-denial/

Climate solutions are frequently attacked by politicians and media pundits who acknowledge the problem, but offer no alternative. Canada has not only entered a new era of climate policy – we’ve entered a new era of denial.

While once rampant, denying human-caused climate change is now considered out-of-touch and has been abandoned by most Canadian political leaders. As a recent poll from Abacus Data found, 90 per cent of Canadians are concerned about climate change. But a new form of denial has risen from the ashes of the old: denying the solutions that empower us to minimize climate change.

Sound familiar....???

Quote
No such option exists for CO2 because viable alternatives do not exist. It is all expensive and pointless virtue signalling.

I'm on the same page as you when it comes to vacuous virtue signalling but doesn't mean I don't see us seriously regretting our failure to do something worthwhile about the issue in a few decades time.


Agree Agree x 2 Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline TimG

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2616
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #158 on: November 05, 2018, 06:09:59 pm »
This article perfectly describes posters here....    since denying climate change is occuring makes you look like an uneducated idiot, these people have changed to denying the solutions.  Same climate deniers, different tactic.
Yawn. Same moronic alarmists that are so obsessed with their own righteousness that they cannot comprehend that reasonable people can look at the facts come to different conclusions.

There is a word for people who denigrate people who do not adhere to their doctrine: religious zealots.

BTW: Everything I have said about the impracticality of doing anything about CO2 given the current state of technology is true. People claiming that action has not occurred because of "big oil" conspiracies or other nonsense are living in self-delusion. Most governments have not acted because they know there is nothing they can do other than **** people off and damage the economy. Those that have acted have payed a high price in terms of higher bills for consumers/voters and have precious little to show for the pain.
« Last Edit: November 05, 2018, 06:22:30 pm by TimG »
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

guest7

  • Guest
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #159 on: November 05, 2018, 07:11:10 pm »
This article perfectly describes posters here....    since denying climate change is occuring makes you look like an uneducated idiot, these people have changed to denying the solutions.  Same climate deniers, different tactic.

Sound familiar....???

I don't give dumbs except reciprocally but if I did...

The idea that just because those of us who know that no-one is going to come up with a solution to AGW should shut up about it because we're deniers is risible.  The evidence that we aren't going to fix it is as plain as the evidence that it exists.  Those who say we will are the deniers.

As for changing, I've known about climate change for about thirty years.  Started realising no-one who could actually do anything about it was taking it seriously about 10 years after that.

So go ahead and pretend, if it makes you feel any better, but don't tell me to.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline Omni

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 8563
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #160 on: November 05, 2018, 07:40:47 pm »
Yawn. Same moronic alarmists that are so obsessed with their own righteousness that they cannot comprehend that reasonable people can look at the facts come to different conclusions.

There is a word for people who denigrate people who do not adhere to their doctrine: religious zealots.

BTW: Everything I have said about the impracticality of doing anything about CO2 given the current state of technology is true. People claiming that action has not occurred because of "big oil" conspiracies or other nonsense are living in self-delusion. Most governments have not acted because they know there is nothing they can do other than **** people off and damage the economy. Those that have acted have payed a high price in terms of higher bills for consumers/voters and have precious little to show for the pain.

True ...in your mind. Actual scientists know better.
Dumb Dumb x 1 View List

Offline Rue

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 835
  • The beast feeds on fear - I feast on the beast.
  • Location: inside a matrix
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #161 on: November 06, 2018, 10:42:37 am »
This article perfectly describes posters here....    since denying climate change is occuring makes you look like an uneducated idiot, Sound familiar....???

Yah it sounds familiar. You use the tactic all the time...when someone disagrees with you and your opinions, you call them names.

What was your point, that you can't debate without getting personal and insulting?

Get off your moral throne and stick to the topic.
You have me mistaken with an eagle. I only come to eat your carcass.

Offline Squidward von Squidderson

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 5630
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #162 on: November 06, 2018, 11:47:36 am »
Yah it sounds familiar. You use the tactic all the time...when someone disagrees with you and your opinions, you call them names.

What was your point, that you can't debate without getting personal and insulting?

Get off your moral throne and stick to the topic.

If you deny gravity, you're an idiot.  If you deny evolution, you're an idiot.  If you deny a round earth, you're an idiot...

It has nothing to do with disagreeing with my opinion. 

Offline Rue

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 835
  • The beast feeds on fear - I feast on the beast.
  • Location: inside a matrix
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #163 on: November 06, 2018, 11:51:58 am »
Yawn. Same moronic alarmists that are so obsessed with their own righteousness that they cannot comprehend that reasonable people can look at the facts come to different conclusions.

There is a word for people who denigrate people who do not adhere to their doctrine: religious zealots.

BTW: Everything I have said about the impracticality of doing anything about CO2 given the current state of technology is true. People claiming that action has not occurred because of "big oil" conspiracies or other nonsense are living in self-delusion. Most governments have not acted because they know there is nothing they can do other than **** people off and damage the economy. Those that have acted have payed a high price in terms of higher bills for consumers/voters and have precious little to show for the pain.

I respect your differences of opinion on this topic but one I disagree with you on is the notion that CO2 emission programs are futile. I do agree to date some programs have not worked as effectively as was hoped but to throw them all out as futile is not accurate.

I do have the same concerns you do that many of emission reduction programs may simply enable the worst of polluters to continue polluting and buying their way out of having to do anything and I base my concern on articles such as this:

http://science.uwaterloo.ca/~mauriced/earth691-duss/CO2_General%20CO2%20Sequestration%20materilas/Early%2520Emissions%2520final%2520revision%2520June%25202001.pdf

However I agree with  the U.N. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change when it concluded  that the world is currently on track to emit enough greenhouse gas emission to exceed 2°C of global warming by 2040 and that beyond that threshold, the risks of "dangerous" ramifications of climate change escalate. Sp O can't buy in to this just sit on our asses mind set as this happens.

I would further argue that since 3/4 of emitted CO2 comes from fuel combustion (anthropogenic origin) and only 1/4 comes from natural CO2 cycles on the planet, it is illogical to justify inaction saying its not something that we humans create and therefore can not be stopped. Blaming mother nature for what is happening and saying we can't change mother nature is for me intellectually dishonest. Its the 3/4's of human created green house gas emissions that are warming the planet we can and should reduce. No one is claiming the 1/4 portion that happens naturally does not happen but some of us are arguing that 1/4 portion is not causing the problems.

So I would argue and take my arguments from: https://www.energycentral.com/c/um/climate-change-bold-approach-co2-emission-reduction-usA is that pursuing a realistic assumption for CO2 reduction is in fact  the most efficient way to reduce CO2 emission.

I would argue we need to replace the worst emitter (coal power plant for electricity) with near zero emission generators such as:

renewable energy sources (wind, solar, biomass;
large hydropower plants;
biomass power plants.

In regards to  biomass power plant burns Sweden has already been using them with positive results.  The biomass is used to  make steam and ultimately electricity. It comes from garbage

Biomass provides 1.8% of US electricity. It has limitations yes, but is it futile of course not. It works.

As well there is solid date that better forest management and slowdown in deforestation contributes to emission reduction and we can control that. Consider this:

1-15% of global carbon dioxide emissions come from deforestation;
2-32 million acres of forest per year were cut and burned from 2000-09;
3-the process of cutting and burning trees adds as much pollution to the atmosphere as all the cars and trucks in the world combined.3 Therefore, any realistic plan to reduce global warming pollution sufficiently—and in time—must include the preservation of tropical forests/

Here is data that proves effective forest management is an effective reducer of CO2emissions:

http://www.fao.org/news/story/en/item/281182/icode/.

Here is a CO2 emission program for airports the State of Israel started in 2014  and people are watching and its very premature to call it futile:

https://www.icao.int/environmental-protection/Lists/ActionPlan/Attachments/51/Israel_Action%20Plan_%20December%202014.pdf

Interesting the program is called: "ICAO Action Plan on CO2 Emission Reduction of Israel" and I am sure the anti Zionists on this board seeing the reference to reduction of Israel will get all excited but alas it refers to CO2 emission reduction, not the reduction of Israel so calm down.

Hell even oil companies are trying to engage in CO2 emission programs. Sure its good pr but if it was stupid, they would not do I. Take for example Irving Oil. It publically states it  recognizes that the emission of greenhouse gases due to human activity is impacting our global climate and requires action by us all. They claim in this regard they are providing cleaner transportation fuels and trying to reduce their  carbon footprint.

They claim to have implemented a  carbon reduction goal to reduce carbon dioxide emissions 17 percent from 2005 levels by 2020, in alignment with GHG reduction targets agreed upon at the 2009 UNFCC Copenhagen Climate Change Conference.

They also claim In 2011 they  were successful in obtaining a 13 percent reduction in our GHG emissions intensity and continue  to investigate new ways to further reduce emissions.

source: https://irvingoil.com/en/corporate-social-responsibility/environmental-responsibility/carbon-reduction/

OK it may be propaganda, good will pr, be cynical, but why is it futile? Why isn't it an example of a positive corporate response?

Nissan has a similar program called the The Nissan Green Program 2016 (NGP2016),which was actually started in  2011:

https://nissannews.com/en-CA/nissan/canada/releases/nissan-global-corporate-activities-reduce-co2-emissions-by-22-6-percent

Why are its efforts futile?

I am also aware of the many arguments saying CO2 emission programs and policies are too costly, but I would argue not necessarily and it depends who you ask. For example there is a policy model by Stanford Graduate School of Business accounting professor Stefan Reichelstein that  suggests it’s not only possible but also less costly than many think.  see: https://www.gsb.stanford.edu/insights/what-would-it-really-cost-reduce-carbon-emissions

Here is my concluding and I think most up to date argument. In the US as everyone knows, Donald Trump has abandon the National Clean Energy Standard and has an Secretary in his cabinet dedicated to undoing all federal pollution and environmental regulations as the article source I quite bekow points out: a number of leading U.S. corporations are implementing climate-changing emissions from their operations and supply chains because as Wayne Batla, the VP of Corporate Envrionental Affairs and Product Safety at IBM was quoted as saying:

"We do it because it makes good business sense—whether it's top of the fold [politically] or not,"

source: https://insideclimatenews.org/news/20120906/major-corporations-quietly-reducing-emissions%E2%80%94and-saving-money

The fact is many members of the corporate sector are on board implementing CO2 emission programs and achieving remission results. How can that not be positive?
You have me mistaken with an eagle. I only come to eat your carcass.
Agree Agree x 1 View List

Offline Rue

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 835
  • The beast feeds on fear - I feast on the beast.
  • Location: inside a matrix
Re: Climate Change
« Reply #164 on: November 06, 2018, 11:54:12 am »
If you deny gravity, you're an idiot.  If you deny evolution, you're an idiot.  If you deny a round earth, you're an idiot...

It has nothing to do with disagreeing with my opinion.

It has everything to do with disagreeing with your opinion You can't take the time to debate. Your cognitive processes clearly are limited
to reducing complex issues to simplistic rigid black and white concepts.

The thread subject clearly is too much for you to handle.  You might want to quite while you are ahead responding to me.

Yes I know you don't are enveloped by gravity.

You have me mistaken with an eagle. I only come to eat your carcass.