[BrianC]

Report: 'Carbon Bombs' Are Poised To Screw Us Over Big Time (gizmodo.com) 202
Posted by BeauHD on Thursday May 12, 2022 @10:30PM from the short-term-profit-vs-long-term-health dept.
An anonymous reader quotes a report from Gizmodo:
Oil and gas companies are gearing up to invest in so many new projects that they'll blow away potential progress to mitigate emissions and stop worst-case climate scenarios, says a new investigation from the Guardian. Why describe them as bombs? If completed, these projects would push climate change well past the 1.5-degree Celsius warming target that the Paris Agreement has set for the world. These projects would literally blow through our carbon budget, the Guardian reports.

But how will this be financed? Oil prices are currently sky high at the pump, and the two largest petroleum companies in the U.S. -- Chevron and ExxonMobil -- have raked in record profits. That means that large fossil fuel companies can bet on expansion projects that could dish even bigger payouts, the Guardian found. [...] The Guardian's investigation found that about 60% of these projects are already pumping, and Canada, Australia, and the U.S. are among the nations with the biggest fossil fuel project expansion plans. The commitment to these projects is pretty clear. Large companies, including Shell, Chevron, BP, PetroChina, and Total Energies, are set to spend over $100 million a day for the rest of this decade on creating projects in new oil and gas fields. This is despite the fact that we might be on track to meet 1.5 degrees of warming in the next four years.
In an editorial follow-up to their investigation, the Guardian says "governments much find ways to promote the long-term health of the planet over short-term profit." They added: "There is no alternative but to force companies to write off the most dangerous investments."
https://news.slashdot.org/story/22/05/1 ... r-big-time

[Plantagenet]

There’s no point in blaming energy companies for pursuing energy projects, especially at a time when the Biden administration is begging other countries to increase their oil production to boost oil supplies and bring down gasoline prices in order to boost Biden’s poll numbers.

No…..the problem clearly lies with Biden and all our other government leaders. The UN Climate change process has been trying for 30 years to draft a global climate treaty to REQUIRE cuts in CO2 emissions. But our government leaders won’t do it. Instead, they just greenwash the whole climate change problem by passing phony climate change “accords” like the Kyoto Accords and the Paris accords which do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions and stop climate change.

Maybe after those climate bombs go off we’ll get a UN climate change treaty to stop climate change………but I doubt that even then it will happen.

Good luck to you.

Cheers!

[Outcast_Searcher]

There’s no point in blaming energy companies for pursuing energy projects, especially at a time when the Biden administration is begging other countries to increase their oil production to boost oil supplies and bring down gasoline prices in order to boost Biden’s poll numbers.

No…..the problem clearly lies with Biden and all our other government leaders. The UN Climate change process has been trying for 30 years to draft a global climate treaty to REQUIRE cuts in CO2 emissions. But our government leaders won’t do it. Instead, they just greenwash the whole climate change problem by passing phony climate change “accords” like the Kyoto Accords and the Paris accords which do nothing to reduce CO2 emissions and stop climate change.

Maybe after those climate bombs go off we’ll get a UN climate change treaty to stop climate change………but I doubt that even then it will happen.

Good luck to you.

Cheers!

So in your usual far right wing distortion field creating, you're going to claim that moving to BEV's (as Biden is trying to help, though not enough) does NOTHING to reduce CO2 emissions?

Yeah, that's as credible as various Trump claims re science.

[Doly]

The UN Climate change process has been trying for 30 years to draft a global climate treaty to REQUIRE cuts in CO2 emissions. But our government leaders won’t do it.

Of course not! Our current political/economic system is based on thinking only in the short term. Some powerful individuals might want to do some long-term thinking, but long-term thinking doesn't get anybody voted or any company's shares going up, so there's no reason for any strategic long-term thinker to stay in a powerful position. Anything beyond a five-year horizon might as well be something that will never happen, from the point of view of the collective power in the West.

[Tanada]

The UN Climate change process has been trying for 30 years to draft a global climate treaty to REQUIRE cuts in CO2 emissions. But our government leaders won’t do it.

Of course not! Our current political/economic system is based on thinking only in the short term. Some powerful individuals might want to do some long-term thinking, but long-term thinking doesn't get anybody voted or any company's shares going up, so there's no reason for any strategic long-term thinker to stay in a powerful position. Anything beyond a five-year horizon might as well be something that will never happen, from the point of view of the collective power in the West.

Sadly this is not only true of the "Western Democracies" it appears to me to be a rather universal rule for every country with moderate to advanced technology. All want more energy to use and despite all the subsidies fossil fuels remain the cheapest financial option and they are all fighting to keep it that way. Oh sure leaders give lots of lip service to fighting global warming, but when it comes to actually implementing policies that reduce human atmospheric impacts they fight against those policies tooth and nail!

[JuanP]

The UN Climate change process has been trying for 30 years to draft a global climate treaty to REQUIRE cuts in CO2 emissions. But our government leaders won’t do it.

Of course not! Our current political/economic system is based on thinking only in the short term. Some powerful individuals might want to do some long-term thinking, but long-term thinking doesn't get anybody voted or any company's shares going up, so there's no reason for any strategic long-term thinker to stay in a powerful position. Anything beyond a five-year horizon might as well be something that will never happen, from the point of view of the collective power in the West.

Sadly this is not only true of the "Western Democracies" it appears to me to be a rather universal rule for every country with moderate to advanced technology. All want more energy to use and despite all the subsidies fossil fuels remain the cheapest financial option and they are all fighting to keep it that way. Oh sure leaders give lots of lip service to fighting global warming, but when it comes to actually implementing policies that reduce human atmospheric impacts they fight against those policies tooth and nail!

Not only governments are like that, people, too! It is a part of human nature and an inevitable consequence of our evolution as a species. That is why I always say we were always doomed as a species; it was always a matter of when and how, not if. The sad part is how many people still don't get it. Humans are not as smart as we think we are, not by a mile. We are still very primitive animals only one step removed from other primates.

[Doly]

Sadly this is not only true of the "Western Democracies" it appears to me to be a rather universal rule for every country with moderate to advanced technology. All want more energy to use and despite all the subsidies fossil fuels remain the cheapest financial option and they are all fighting to keep it that way.

If you look at the countries with the best climate policies, you see a few patterns:

1. Scandinavia and Lithuania. Small countries, rich, social democracies. Being small makes it easier to build a social consensus, being rich makes easy to implement an expensive plan. Social democracies value equality highly, which makes it easier to build social consensus, and a focus on social policies makes them more likely to think in the long term.

2. A few Mediterranean countries (France, Portugal, Morocco). I think Mediterranean culture makes it easier to build social consensus around an issue. Part of it is not placing as much value on money, so it's easier for people to go along with an expensive project if it's thought to bring other benefits.

3. Netherlands. Similar to Scandinavia in many ways, with the added factor of being at high risk because big areas of the country are effectively under sea level.

4. China. In spite of many issues, and that they still aren't doing enough, there is no question that they are trying really hard, with specific plans, and they are building a lot of the renewable technology that exists. A long tradition of long-term thinking and of building consensus probably has to do with it.

So I think there are several kinds of countries with a good enough political/economic/cultural mix, it's just that they are a minority.

I'd also point out that for Russia, their national interest might not be fighting climate change. Oil and gas are major exports for them and a warmer climate can make Siberian agriculture better. So for all we know, they might be thinking in the long term, it's just that what's good for them is not what's good for everyone else.

[Plantagenet]

If you look at the countries with the best climate policies....

..... China. In spite of many issues, and that they still aren't doing enough, there is no question that they are trying really hard, with specific plans, and they are building a lot of the renewable technology that exists. A long tradition of long-term thinking and of building consensus probably has to do with it.

You've got to be kidding.

China is by far the largest carbon polluter in the world, and China's CO2 emissions continue to grow rapidly.

And China isn't "trying really hard" either. China's CO2 emissions are still going up and they are still building new coal-fired power plants.

And if it wasn't bad enough that China is the world's largest CO2 emitter due to the huge number of coal-fired power plants in China, China is also funding and building many coal-fired power plants in foreign countries as part of their "aid" program.


The data is very clear that China is the worst country on the planet when it comes to carbon emissions and that means they are the worst country on the planet in terms of their contributions to climate change.

Cheers!