Donate Bitcoin

Donate Paypal


PeakOil is You

PeakOil is You

International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby Plantagenet » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 00:40:03

independent environmental groups express disappointment with lack of real progress at COP24 in Poland

cop24-climate-change-deal-poland-emissions-global-warming-katowice-paris-weak-agreement

Jennifer Morgan, executive director at Greenpeace International, said: “A year of climate disasters and a dire warning from the world’s top scientists should have led to so much more.

“Instead, governments let people down again as they ignored the science and the plight of the vulnerable.

“it...... is not nearly enough".


This problem started with the fraudulent Paris Accords. Because the Paris Accords didn't mandate reductions in CO2 emissions, and actually called for INCREASING CO2 emissions, they were even worse then worthless. Now, two years later, we build on that flawed foundation with another weak, meaningless agreement that again does nothing to reduce CO2 emissions.

And in the absence of a UN climate treaty that requires reductions in CO2 emissions....CO2 emissions are going to go UP.

In 2017, the year after the Paris Accords, global CO2 emissions increased to record levels. Preliminary data suggests that CO2 emissions rose again in 2018, to another all time record. That shows the Paris Accords are worthless right there....if they are having any effect at all, it is that they are causing CO2 emission to go up.

Cheers!
"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21972
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby asg70 » Wed 19 Dec 2018, 10:59:43

"if they are having any effect at all, it is that they are causing CO2 emission to go up. "

You'd know all about that, wouldn't you?

Oh, the humanity. The crocodile tears are flowing. Go jump on a plane and work out your grief.
"this is peak now. Wanna bet? The Real Pain starts . . . now." (11/21/18)" --pstarr
"$0/barrel soon as per etp." (12/30/18)" --pstarr
ATTN: SHORT LOST A BET AND WON'T EVEN ADMIT HE MADE ONE. HE SHOULD NOT BE WELCOME HERE!
asg70
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2261
Joined: Sun 05 Feb 2017, 13:17:28

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby dohboi » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 10:30:00

Australia to miss 2030 emissions targets by vast margin, Coalition's projections reveal

Emissions projections report shows Scott Morrison’s claims Australia will meet obligations under Paris agreement are incorrect


It projects total emissions in 2030 will be 563 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent, which is an emissions reduction of 7% on 2005 levels.

Australia’s targets under the Paris agreement are for a 26% to 28% emissions reduction on 2005 levels.

The report says emissions in 2030 are projected to climb 4% above 2020 levels driven by higher levels of liquefied natural gas production, growth in agriculture, increased transport activity and a drop in the amount of carbon reduction from activities such as reforestation in the land use sector.

The report projects emissions from all sectors, except for electricity, waste and land use, will grow by 2030.



https://www.theguardian.com/environment ... ons-reveal
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17961
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby GHung » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 10:50:41

I'm afraid George pretty much nails it:

......
We need to be absolutely clear on one thing regarding what can be done to solve the immediacy of the climate catastrophe (according to the IPCC report) and that is that market-based mechanisms will simply not work to reduce carbon emissions in any meaningful way. Even a very steep tax on carbon, a policy measure rather than a strictly free market approach, probably won't do the job either, especially if the scheme involves rebating the money to the consumers. Any cost of carbon scheme needs to hurt both consumers and producers equally and sufficiently to force them to change their behaviors. Taking money out of my wallet and putting it into my pocket is not going to accomplish anything.

Only one thing will give us a chance to survive - and then only some of us. We have to stop burning fossil fuels period and that is going to make us extremely poor. We have to abandon capitalism, for profit (and especially profit maximization), growth oriented firms and relocalize, i.e. reform local communities able to collectively meet their basic needs. We have to abandon cars and trucks and airplanes and probably even trains.

We probably won't take the initiative and there are no leaders on the world stage that would risk being booted off of that stage by telling people that they will have to give up most of the trappings of civilization. So what is most likely to happen, as I have predicted before, is that we will continue to cling to our old ways until it is obviously too late (which may already be the case) and the loss of fossil fuel energies (they will be too expensive to extract and refine) and the damage to our social fabric done by climate catastrophes force us to do these things. .....
https://questioneverything.typepad.com/ ... it-is.html
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 18:32:57

GHung wrote: Even a very steep tax on carbon....won't do the job....
Only one thing will give us a chance to survive .... We have to stop burning fossil fuels


The carbon tax is a reasonable mechanism to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Its a proven fact that when things become more expensive, people use less of them.

Its magical thinking to proclaim "we have to stop burning fossil fuels" and then assume it will happen. Things don't happen just because someone says they should happen.

Cheers!
"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21972
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby GHung » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 18:56:37

Plantagenet wrote:
GHung wrote: Even a very steep tax on carbon....won't do the job....
Only one thing will give us a chance to survive .... We have to stop burning fossil fuels


The carbon tax is a reasonable mechanism to reduce the use of fossil fuels. Its a proven fact that when things become more expensive, people use less of them.

Its magical thinking to proclaim "we have to stop burning fossil fuels" and then assume it will happen. Things don't happen just because someone says they should happen. .....


.... and some things don't happen until it's too late, or don't happen at all. I've been for a carbon tax for a while, but don't fool myself into thinking it'll make a big difference regarding climate change. It's more about getting folks used to living with the consequences of 200 years of unfettered growth. People will get used to much lower levels of consumption, one way or another. They don't have to like it.

....Oh,, and Ghung didn't write that quote you attributed to him, even if he mostly agrees with it. That was the work of the venerable George Mobus who, incidentally, has a new post up today (he generally posts on the equinox and solstice).
https://questioneverything.typepad.com/ ... 2018-.html
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby Cog » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 19:05:09

There is always a smell of socialism and communism in every carbon cutting proposal that I've seen.

A good example:

We have to abandon capitalism, for profit (and especially profit maximization), growth oriented firms and relocalize, i.e. reform local communities able to collectively meet their basic needs.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" Karl Marx
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12064
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby GHung » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 19:13:32

Cog wrote:There is always a smell of socialism and communism in every carbon cutting proposal that I've seen.

A good example:

We have to abandon capitalism, for profit (and especially profit maximization), growth oriented firms and relocalize, i.e. reform local communities able to collectively meet their basic needs.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" Karl Marx


You can label systems all you want. What you aren't man enough to do is admit that the current way we are doing things is a dead end on a finite planet. While you're at it, why not admit that you simply don't give a shit as long as you are free to do as you like, other Earthlings be damned.

.... and I don't see you offering any solutions.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby onlooker » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 19:27:18

Tragedy of the Commons. The hell with the future and others
"We are mortal beings doomed to die
User avatar
onlooker
Fission
Fission
 
Posts: 10268
Joined: Sun 10 Nov 2013, 12:49:04
Location: NY, USA

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby Plantagenet » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 19:29:25

I haven't read George Mobus before, but from what I've seen George Mobus has a distinct tendency toward "magical thinking." His magical thinking is clearly on display in his latest post (see link in gung's post above). Mobus writes:

"We are an evolutionary experiment that could go either way.

One thing I am sure of. The socioeconomic system we currently have is completely unsustainable. But there will have to be some further development in the human brain in order for a species of humans to regroup and have any kind of society at all.
"

Thats a lot of silliness. Calling on the human human to evolve before we can even begin to solve problems or even have a society is magical thinking at its worst. IMHO its much better to face problems head on, analyze them, and decide on the best course of action instead of waiting for some magical event like human brains evolving toward perfection to arrive and save the day. AND there already such a thing as human society right now----its flawed but it exists-----something that Mobus can't even see.

Cheers!
"Its a brave new world"
---President Obama, 4/25/16
User avatar
Plantagenet
Expert
Expert
 
Posts: 21972
Joined: Mon 09 Apr 2007, 02:00:00
Location: Alaska (its much bigger than Texas).

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby GHung » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 19:43:09

Plantagenet wrote:I haven't read George Mobus before, but from what I've seen George Mobus has a distinct tendency toward "magical thinking." His magical thinking is clearly on display in his latest post (see link in gung's post above). Mobus writes:

"We are an evolutionary experiment that could go either way.

One thing I am sure of. The socioeconomic system we currently have is completely unsustainable. But there will have to be some further development in the human brain in order for a species of humans to regroup and have any kind of society at all.
"

Thats a lot of silliness. Calling on the human human to evolve before we can even begin to solve problems or even have a society is magical thinking at its worst. IMHO its much better to face problems head on, analyze them, and decide on the best course of action instead of waiting for some magical event like human brains evolving toward perfection to arrive and save the day. AND there already such a thing as human society right now----its flawed but it exists-----something that Mobus can't even see.

Cheers!


I'm not surprised how quickly you pass judgement on someone from a few lines, someone you admit to not knowing about and have clearly never read.

Mobus:
....has a PhD in CS, an MBA in Decision Science, and a baccalaureate in Zoology (with substantial coursework in math, chemistry, and oceanography)...
most recently: ....... retired from full-time teaching computer science and engineering at the University of Washington Tacoma, School of Engineering and Technology.

Basically he's a systems guy who understands that you can't have your cake and eat it ,,,,, all that. Maybe you can fly down and explain things to him on your next world jaunt.
Blessed are the Meek, for they shall inherit nothing but their Souls. - Anonymous Ghung Person
User avatar
GHung
Intermediate Crude
Intermediate Crude
 
Posts: 2742
Joined: Tue 08 Sep 2009, 15:06:11
Location: Moksha, Nearvana

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby Cog » Fri 21 Dec 2018, 20:08:34

GHung wrote:
Cog wrote:There is always a smell of socialism and communism in every carbon cutting proposal that I've seen.

A good example:

We have to abandon capitalism, for profit (and especially profit maximization), growth oriented firms and relocalize, i.e. reform local communities able to collectively meet their basic needs.

"From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs" Karl Marx


You can label systems all you want. What you aren't man enough to do is admit that the current way we are doing things is a dead end on a finite planet. While you're at it, why not admit that you simply don't give a shit as long as you are free to do as you like, other Earthlings be damned.

.... and I don't see you offering any solutions.


Why would I offer a solution to a problem that solves itself?
User avatar
Cog
Fusion
Fusion
 
Posts: 12064
Joined: Sat 17 May 2008, 02:00:00
Location: Northern Kekistan

Re: International Climate Negotiations Pt. 3

Unread postby dohboi » Wed 13 Feb 2019, 22:20:08

https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfr ... rch-claims

Australia won’t meet the Paris targets despite what recent research claims


There’s no way we’ll achieve the targets five years early without major policy changes, which are unlikely under the current government


The Australian National University has been making headlines for its analysis that, with the current rate of renewable energy growth, Australia will achieve its Paris agreement targets five years early – by 2025. Unfortunately, after a careful review, we find their analysis doesn’t stack up.

Numerous international and national efforts to examine Australia’s climate and energy policy have all concluded that the government will not reach, on present policy settings, the 26-28% reduction from 2005 levels by 2030 it has put forward under the Paris agreement.
To achieve a 26% reduction below 2005 levels in national emissions – the lower end of Australia’s Paris agreement target – would require about a 75% penetration of renewables in the power sector by 2024, whereas the ANU scenario projects 50%, which is not enough to reach the Paris target.

The ANU briefing, possibly inadvertently, creates the impression that all that would be required is a continuation of the recent rate of renewable energy deployment. That is simply not the case, not without major policy interventions, which are unlikely – at least under the current government. The rapid and continued rollout of renewable energy into the power sector assumed in the ANU briefing paper is something that the Australian government actually opposes.

The government’s policies are aimed at slowing the renewable energy rollout, and in particular maintaining coal in the power sector at any scale, which essentially contradicts the premises of the ANU paper.

The present large and increasing rollout in the utility sector is driven by the renewable energy target. Given that this expires in 2020, that specific economic incentive will disappear.

While the penetration of 50% renewables by 2025 may be plausible in the absence of further policy developments, it is not considered plausible that close to 90% penetration could be achieved by 2030 without substantial policy action.

Such reductions would also require phasing out coal almost completely from the power sector by 2030, which is clearly not supported by a federal government that is currently trying to promote more coal power, not less.

While the low cost of new renewable supply is also a clear driver, market barriers are already in evidence, along with grid connection issues that require active intervention.
User avatar
dohboi
Harmless Drudge
Harmless Drudge
 
Posts: 17961
Joined: Mon 05 Dec 2005, 03:00:00

Previous

Return to Environment, Weather & Climate

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 19 guests