Page 20 of 21

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 14:18:56
by Newfie
No, a certain number do. Clearly not enough.



But even if you were right, what is your point?

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 14:42:56
by ROCKMAN
revi - Here's the problems with thinking PO ( and eventually PNG) will "save some of us', You really should step bac and see the world as it really is. Will those with the financial/military strength just sit there and watch their economies for a lack of energy? IOW when in history have you seen that happen? Has human nature changed that much in your opinion?

Second major problem: will those weaker economies unable to use oil or NG to fuel their economies ignore the cheaper and more available coal to sustain their citizens? Again if you truly believe that then we need to end our chat right now IMHO.

Yes: that is my very dim view of human nature. Countless situations in the world today support my view IMHO.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 14:59:59
by Newfie
That’s exactly why I hedged my comments when I said a deep global depression MIGHT buy some time. I forget where it was I was reading about it, it was about the amount of ammunition it takes to kill someone in war. The author said something like “humans really want to live and it can be damn hard to shoot them.”

Lots of simple truth there. I was just reading how the Germans were suprised at how long it took to starve out the Russians during WWII. The Russians would eat ANYTHING to stay alive. Dig up dead horses. Same with far north explorers, I sarcastically call the “boot eaters.” Besides that they would sometimes dig up the frozen offal and bones of animals killed in the spring on the way out and consume those remnanats. Didn’t guarantee survival, but it describes how hard SOME of us kling to life.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Thu 15 Nov 2018, 15:23:10
by KaiserJeep
I saw an article on Climate Change on the PBS News yesterday. Basicly, in 2015 there was a problem with algae blooms because of warmer sea water, in turn caused by a combination of CC, the latest El Niño, and a mass of warm water in the Pacific Ocean known as "The Blob". This caused the Dungeoness Crabs and Rock Crabs of the US West Coast crab fisheries to absorb and retain Domoic Acid from the algal bloom in the water around them. Also effected were filter feeders like mussels and clams and so forth. This ended the 2015 crab season and led to much reduced demand for crabs and mussels and other shellfish from the West Coast fisheries that year and in 2016. Also of note, many marine mammals were sickened by the toxin.

The Net/Net is that beginning in 2015 and continuing in 2016 and 2017, many shell fishermen went under, declaring bankruptcy. One of them was interviewed in a local drinking establishment. He was quite bitter and disclosed that they were banding together to bring a class lawsuit against the petroleum producers for causing the CC that ruined their businesses.

Image

Then several video shots of several fishing boats, each spewing noxious plumes. Most of these fishermen probably had older boats, grandfathered with regard to emissions.

BAU. Petroleum fuel consumers feel no resposibility for pollution, and blame those they buy fuel from. How many of you complaining about CC own vehicles with fuel tanks?

Just as electric grid customers are ready to blame the Koch brothers for selling coal.

Really, you can pollute and complain, or choose to not pollute as much as possible.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sat 17 Nov 2018, 07:43:41
by Newfie
Interesting article on French protests over increased Gisselle prices, in part as a green conservation effort.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-46233560

So much for the people’s understanding of CC and their willingness to change.

Why are drivers on the warpath?
The price of diesel, the most commonly used fuel in French cars, has risen by around 23% over the past 12 months to an average of €1.51 (£1.32; $1.71) per litre, its highest point since the early 2000s, AFP news agency reports.
World oil prices did rise before falling back again but the Macron government raised its hydrocarbon tax this year by 7.6 cents per litre on diesel and 3.9 cents on petrol, as part of a campaign for cleaner cars and fuel.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sat 17 Nov 2018, 09:00:56
by Cog
It's always easier to raise taxes if someone else is paying them.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sat 17 Nov 2018, 09:41:41
by Ibon
Cog wrote:It's always easier to raise taxes if someone else is paying them.


It's also easier to raise taxes if a folks referendum to do so is voted affirmative by the majority of citizens. While living in Switzerland in the 80's there was a folks referendum to increase gasoline and diesel tax by .27 rappen a liter in order to finance a huge mass transit initiative. It was approved.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sat 17 Nov 2018, 11:37:32
by Newfie
Cog wrote:It's always easier to raise taxes if someone else is paying them.


Climate Cange can be viewed as a TAX on development to be paid by future generations.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Thu 12 May 2022, 21:34:29
by Tanada
Climate change: 'Fifty-fifty chance' of breaching 1.5C warming limit

By Matt McGrath
Environment correspondent

Published
2 days ago

Rising temperatures are linked to more extreme weather events such as these floods in China

The likelihood of crossing a key global warming threshold has risen significantly, according to a new analysis.

UK Met Office researchers say that there's now around a fifty-fifty chance that the world will warm by more than 1.5C over the next five years.

Such a rise would be temporary, but researchers are concerned about the overall direction of temperatures.

It's almost certain that 2022-2026 will see a record warmest year, they say.

The Met Office is the UK's national meteorological service.

As levels of warming gases in the atmosphere have accrued rapidly over the past three decades, global temperatures have responded by rising in step.

In 2015, the world's average temperature first went 1C above the pre-industrial levels, which are generally thought of as the temperatures recorded in the middle of the 19th century.

That was also the year that political leaders signed the Paris climate agreement, which committed the world to keeping the rise in global temperatures well below 2C while pursuing efforts keep them under 1.5C.

At COP26 in Glasgow last November, governments re-iterated their commitment to keeping "1.5C alive."

For the past seven years, global temperatures have stayed at or around that 1C mark, with 2016 and 2020 essentially tied as the warmest years on record.

Scientists say that with around 1C of warming the world is already experiencing significant impacts such as the unprecedented wildfires seen in North America last year, or the drastic heatwaves currently hitting India and Pakistan.

This update from the World Meteorological Organisation (WMO), carried out by the UK Met Office, says that the chances of temporarily going over 1.5C in one of the next five years have never been higher.

The study suggests that temperatures between 2022 and 2026 will be between 1.1C and 1.7C higher than pre-industrial levels.

The Met Office researchers predict that for any one year in the period, the likelihood of breaching the 1.5C level is around 48%, or close to 50:50.

"The basic thing that's changing is that the carbon dioxide levels in the atmosphere, are slowly creeping up," said Dr Leon Hermanson from the Met Office, the lead author of the report.

"I think people are already quite concerned about climate change and it is worrying, it is showing that we continue to warm the planet and we're getting closer to this first threshold that was set in the Paris agreement - and we need to continue doing everything we can to cut the use of fossil fuels."

The researchers say that going over 1.5C for one year isn't the same as a sustained rise where temperatures don't fall below this figure. The likelihood is that if it is exceeded in the next five years, it will fall below 1.5C again. However there is now little room for complacency.

"For as long as we continue to emit greenhouse gases, temperatures will continue to rise," said Prof Petteri Taalas from the WMO.

"And alongside that, our oceans will continue to become warmer and more acidic, sea ice and glaciers will continue to melt, sea level will continue to rise and our weather will become more extreme," he said.

According to the study, the Arctic region will likely feel a greater impact of warming over the next five years compared to the rest of the world. The researchers say that the difference in temperatures from the long-term average will be three times as large in these areas.

The researchers also believe that one of the coming years will likely break the 2016 and 2020 record for warmest year.

That will happen, most likely in an El Niño year.

That's a natural, meteorological phenomenon associated with an unusual warming of the surface waters of the eastern Pacific ocean that can impact weather all over the world.

"The year we do exceed 1.5 degrees temporarily will probably be an El Niño year," said Dr Hermanson from the Met Office.

"It's on top of climate change, kind of like the wiggles on top of the trend, if you like, and the next record year will probably be an El Niño year, like 2016 was."

Follow Matt on Twitter @mattmcgrathbbc.
BBC.com

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Fri 13 May 2022, 13:02:49
by Doly
Climate Cange can be viewed as a TAX on development to be paid by future generations.


Not really, since tax is money collected by governments. Climate change isn't about money, and governments don't have a lot to do with carbon emissions.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Fri 13 May 2022, 15:10:29
by Newfie
Doly,

You and I have drastically different opinions on those matters.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Fri 13 May 2022, 15:35:36
by jedrider
Doly wrote:
Climate Cange can be viewed as a TAX on development to be paid by future generations.


Not really, since tax is money collected by governments. Climate change isn't about money, and governments don't have a lot to do with carbon emissions.


It's the 'reverse mortgage' of 'futures trading' on everyone's 'grandchildren.'

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Thu 19 May 2022, 16:01:59
by Plantagenet
Doly wrote:……..governments don't have a lot to do with carbon emissions.


On the contrary. Governments can regulate or even outlaw discharges of hazardous chemicals. They do it all the time.

It is entirely within the purview of Goverments to outlaw emissions of Greenhouse gases. Of course they havent’ done it yet…….but thats just because our government leaders are cowards and thieves and liars who refuse to take action on this issue.

Cheers!

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sat 21 May 2022, 14:31:41
by evilgenius
Plantagenet wrote:
Doly wrote:……..governments don't have a lot to do with carbon emissions.


On the contrary. Governments can regulate or even outlaw discharges of hazardous chemicals. They do it all the time.

It is entirely within the purview of Goverments to outlaw emissions of Greenhouse gases. Of course they havent’ done it yet…….but thats just because our government leaders are cowards and thieves and liars who refuse to take action on this issue.

Cheers!

Come on, don't hide. Say what you mean. Crossed fingered peace sign emoji, only I don't know where to find one. Especially one with a Rodney Dangerfield accent! Do you remember that hilarious encounter of his in Back to School with Sam Kinnison? Well, I know you want people to admit that Truman was too much of a pussy except, this time, over climate change. Because, mostly, it is true, by God.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sat 21 May 2022, 16:37:48
by Doly
It is entirely within the purview of Goverments to outlaw emissions of Greenhouse gases.


Outlawing emissions of greenhouse gases would mean outlawing burning of all fossil fuels. Which are the main source of energy in most countries today. So there's little chance any government is going to pass that sort of law any time soon, except maybe in some small countries that have made big steps into moving away from fossil fuels (I'm thinking Sweden or Finland, maybe).

Governments can pass laws to limit emissions, in principle. But no government has done yet anything more than sign to agreements with little accountability. So they can, and many do, ignore it if they don't hold to the agreement.

The next problem is how emissions are supposed to be limited. A carbon tax would probably work in principle, but governments have refrained from passing carbon taxes, because all sorts of taxes are unpopular, and a carbon tax is particularly unpopular. And alternative schemes that have been applied are easier to game (and probably were proposed precisely because they were easier to game).

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sun 22 May 2022, 10:17:42
by Tanada
Doly wrote:
It is entirely within the purview of Goverments to outlaw emissions of Greenhouse gases.


Outlawing emissions of greenhouse gases would mean outlawing burning of all fossil fuels. Which are the main source of energy in most countries today. So there's little chance any government is going to pass that sort of law any time soon, except maybe in some small countries that have made big steps into moving away from fossil fuels (I'm thinking Sweden or Finland, maybe).

Governments can pass laws to limit emissions, in principle. But no government has done yet anything more than sign to agreements with little accountability. So they can, and many do, ignore it if they don't hold to the agreement.

The next problem is how emissions are supposed to be limited. A carbon tax would probably work in principle, but governments have refrained from passing carbon taxes, because all sorts of taxes are unpopular, and a carbon tax is particularly unpopular. And alternative schemes that have been applied are easier to game (and probably were proposed precisely because they were easier to game).


The thing is people as a general rule who are motivated enough to vote are mature enough to know some taxation is necessary for government to complete necessary functions. The US federal congress could pass a massive carbon tax today IF and ONLY IF they eliminated a similar value of other taxes they already have in place. The issue becomes the Congress loves spending tax monies and they are loath to give up a single penny of existing taxation. It they repealed all Fuel taxes i.e. Gasoline, Diesel, Kerosene for road use taxes and replaced them with a carbon tax that was of similar scope 99% of the population would not bat an eyelash. They could even similarly increase those fuel taxes if at the same time they declared that all income taxes for individuals earning less than 100,000.00 annually or couples earning 200,000.00 were rescinded and your employer was to stop collecting them immediately. This would almost instantly shift the taxes from income to carbon consumption and people would not only be able to still live the same lifestyle more or less because their pay would increase right along with higher fuel taxes, to a large extent they could lower their tax burden by being more frugal in buying CO2 emitting fuels.

However that would mean the government had less revenue potentially to spend and the politicians are loath to face that possibility. Far better in their eyes to extract your taxes through your employer before you ever see the first dollar of your pay. That way the more you earn the more they get to keep instead of being dependent on a revenue source you could reduce by living more frugally or switching to an electric vehicle.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sun 22 May 2022, 10:26:02
by vtsnowedin
The trick would be to raise some tax by some name just enough to incentivize EVs and renewable power systems enough to keep them selling as fast as they are built without overdoing it and trashing the economy. The present administration has the cart before the horse and is creating a backlash which will stall all efforts to switch to a lower carbon future, purhaps for decades.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sun 22 May 2022, 19:47:21
by suxs
The trick would be to raise some tax by some name. The present administration has the cart before the horse and is creating a backlash which will stall all efforts to switch to a lower carbon future, purhaps for decades.


Got it. Raise some tax by some name and problem solved. Submit your comment to the WSJ or Washington Post for publication.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Sun 22 May 2022, 23:27:50
by vtsnowedin
suxs wrote:
The trick would be to raise some tax by some name. The present administration has the cart before the horse and is creating a backlash which will stall all efforts to switch to a lower carbon future, purhaps for decades.


Got it. Raise some tax by some name and problem solved. Submit your comment to the WSJ or Washington Post for publication.

You missed that "just enough" cravat.

Re: Is the 2°C world a fantasy?

Unread postPosted: Mon 23 May 2022, 15:22:42
by Doly
You missed that "just enough" cravat.


That wasn't the main issue, the issue is that your idea is too vague to even count as a proposal.