[dohboi]

You beat me to it, Cabrone.

The fact that Lorenzo didn't even have an idea where this guy was on the political spectrum makes it pretty humorous for L to call Monbiot an idiot.

Monbiot is the only voice I have heard anywhere in the main stream media calling for what actually needs to be done--quit mining coal and extracting oil.

This is carbon that is safely and securely sequestered deep in the earth. We are literally moving mountains in order to spew it into the atmosphere and that activity is killing the planet.

Any idiot should be able to see that continuing to do this is insanity. But so far as I've seen, Monbiot is the only "idiot" in the MSM to actually point this out.

Your are right, Lorenzo, that we need to put things on as fast a track as possible. But what are your own ingenious suggestions in this direction, besides your biofuels money-making schemes?

[Lanthanide]

To be honest, if all of those changes were done as fast as indicated, I think it would pretty much crash the economy right there, which in itself would cut a large amount of emissions out.

Or maybe that was the point.

[mos6507]

To be honest, if all of those changes were done as fast as indicated, I think it would pretty much crash the economy right there

survival of the planet > survival of the current economic system

[dohboi]

Nicely put, mos, and very succinct!

"it would pretty much crash the economy"

And what exactly is happening to the economy now? And this mostly for reasons of extraordinary greed rather than to save anything.

[jedrider]

Mr Obama, here's your Copenhagen speech

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/georgemonbiot+copenhagen

Heard his speech on Pacifica Radio today. He makes an impassioned speech for keeping fossil fuels in the ground by not developing new fields. He says we can develop no more than 60 percent of our reserves before climate change of at least a few degrees is irrevocable. He says to err on the safe side and make that 40 percent.

[Ludi]

Unfortunately, unless keeping the fossil fuels in the ground can be made as lucrative as extracting them, they will be extracted.

[dissident]

This is where government can do its job and make alternatives competitive by taxing and regulating the hell out of the fossil fuel dependent industries. Really, what are governments for? To collect taxes to give to their patrons (not the public)?

[SeaGypsy]

Unfortunately, unless keeping the fossil fuels in the ground can be made as lucrative as extracting them, they will be extracted.

lucre
/lookr/

• noun literary money, especially when gained dishonourably.

— ORIGIN Latin lucrum.

From the Oxford online dictionary.

[mcgowanjm]

Unfortunately, unless keeping the fossil fuels in the ground can be made as lucrative as extracting them, they will be extracted.

lucre
/lookr/

• noun literary money, especially when gained dishonourably.

— ORIGIN Latin lucrum.

From the Oxford online dictionary.

Better: We will not be able to drill for the rest of it.

For Ex-Xmas Eve's two Black Swans:

California Asks Rest of Nation's Taxpayers to Help Pay for Its Unbalanced Budget and Fannie/Freddie Unlimited Fail

plus the continued PO decline:

Mr. Tony Okonedo, insisted that no oil pipeline was sabotaged in the Niger Delta.
As Shell looks to leave Nigeria
and
Pipeline sabotage halts Iraq oil exports
December 20, 2009
and
Yemen Oil exports dropping as fast as Cantarell(which itself
reports in January[SWAG 425,000].

So where does the $$$ go? Shale Gas and drilling? OR
to keep the US/UK Standard of Living from collapsing?

[pablonite]

Climate Change: The Global Media Presents an Apocalyptic Scenario
http://globalresearch.ca/index.php?context=va&aid=16437

The following text (in annex) was published simultaneously by major Newspapers around the World. It constitutes a Worldwide public relations initiative, intended to sway public opinion into unreservedly accepting the "Global Warming consensus". The text of the editorial was prepared by The Guardian team...

Don't you ever get the feeling you are being catapulted with propaganda?

[jedrider]

Don't you ever get the feeling you are being catapulted with propaganda?

Either AGW is true or it is not true. It doesn't require propaganda. However, people do need to be aware of it.

Monbiots point is practically:

1. We have to keep the carbon in the ground in order to survives centuries hence -- starting with the first century.
2. Basically, that is a supply side paradigm.
3. It should probably be enforced -- he didn't get that far, but I'm adding that for him.

Al Gore is climate change lite and it is time to go beyond that.

James Hansen still thinks there is time, precious little, but time.

[pablonite]

Monbiots point is practically:

1. We have to keep the carbon in the ground in order to survives centuries hence -- starting with the first century.
2. Basically, that is a supply side paradigm.
3. It should probably be enforced -- he didn't get that far, but I'm adding that for him.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/George_Monbiot

Monbiot believes that drastic action coupled with strong political will is needed to combat global warming. Monbiot has written that climate change is the "moral question of the 21st century" and that there is little time for debate or objections to a raft of emergency actions he believes will stop climate change, including: setting targets on greenhouse emissions using the latest science; issuing every citizen with a 'personal carbon ration'...

I like the guy and everything, his heart seems to be in the right place.
I have no problem with this idea except implementing it with any modicum of justice and equality is a complete joke!
No worries though, we already know the bankster and big oil are already on it!

[thuja]

Yup the heart of the matter is keeping carbon in the ground. All of this bla bla bla about carbon emissions caps, trading, etc is all bogus. We have to stop drilling and burning it if we want to confront AGW. And I'm afraid...that's implausible. The only hope we have is that Peak Oil/Peak Coal/Nat Gas will lead to collapse that will make it econocially impossible to drill what's left.

[cudabachi]

Yup the heart of the matter is keeping carbon in the ground. All of this bla bla bla about carbon emissions caps, trading, etc is all bogus. We have to stop drilling and burning it if we want to confront AGW. And I'm afraid...that's implausible. The only hope we have is that Peak Oil/Peak Coal/Nat Gas will lead to collapse that will make it econocially impossible to drill what's left.

When the cost to extract a barrel of oil equals the value of that barrel of oil, drilling will cease, even if oil is valued at $1MM/barrel.

[Lore]

Yup the heart of the matter is keeping carbon in the ground. All of this bla bla bla about carbon emissions caps, trading, etc is all bogus. We have to stop drilling and burning it if we want to confront AGW. And I'm afraid...that's implausible. The only hope we have is that Peak Oil/Peak Coal/Nat Gas will lead to collapse that will make it econocially impossible to drill what's left.

The problem is the genie is already out of the bottle. Even if we say the world will consume fossil fuels at a rate below today, we would still have enough for the next 30 - 40 years to push us well over 450 ppm. During which time there would be the increased release of methane, oceans instead of becoming carbon sinks would become saturated and start to also give back their sequestered carbon, humans reverting to the age of wood and burning it for fuel and heat, not to mention ice cap albedo feedback… etc, etc.

[jedrider]

I like the guy and everything, his heart seems to be in the right place.
I have no problem with this idea except implementing it with any modicum of justice and equality is a complete joke!
No worries though, we already know the bankster and big oil are already on it!

That is precisely the problem that we need to wrest control of the government from the banksters. That's it in a nut shell. I look at it as requiring a wartime economy.

Yes, justice and equality could be a joke. Best to keep the resource in the ground and let the remaining populace compete or even fight over the remainder.

I don't believe in justice quite so much as we should be paying for stewardship, paying a price for populations to preserve the forests and resouces remaining. That's as far as justice should go.

[thuja]

Yup the heart of the matter is keeping carbon in the ground. All of this bla bla bla about carbon emissions caps, trading, etc is all bogus. We have to stop drilling and burning it if we want to confront AGW. And I'm afraid...that's implausible. The only hope we have is that Peak Oil/Peak Coal/Nat Gas will lead to collapse that will make it econocially impossible to drill what's left.

The problem is the genie is already out of the bottle. Even if we say the world will consume fossil fuels at a rate below today, we would still have enough for the next 30 - 40 years to push us well over 450 ppm. During which time there would be the increased release of methane, oceans instead of becoming carbon sinks would become saturated and start to also give back their sequestered carbon, humans reverting to the age of wood and burning it for fuel and heat, not to mention ice cap albedo feedback… etc, etc.

OK OK uncle!! I just finished Christmas freaking dinner man! Then maybe a little scotch and a glass of wine tonight. I will not think of the future! I will not I will not I will not...

[TheDude]

These astroturf libertarians are the real threat to internet democracy | George Monbiot | Comment is free | The Guardian

I first came across online astroturfing in 2002, when the investigators Andy Rowell and Jonathan Matthews looked into a series of comments made by two people calling themselves Mary Murphy and Andura Smetacek. They had launched ferocious attacks, across several internet forums, against a scientist whose research suggested that Mexican corn had been widely contaminated by GM pollen.

Rowell and Matthews found that one of the messages Mary Murphy had sent came from a domain owned by the Bivings Group, a PR company specialising in internet lobbying. An article on the Bivings website explained that "there are some campaigns where it would be undesirable or even disastrous to let the audience know that your organisation is directly involved … Message boards, chat rooms, and listservs are a great way to anonymously monitor what is being said. Once you are plugged into this world, it is possible to make postings to these outlets that present your position as an uninvolved third party."

"Discuss."

[Plantagenet]

The Bivins Group was the corporation doing the astroturf work boosting the "Pickens Plan" to replace oil in the US transportation sector with natural gas and windmills. I wonder if "PeakOil.com" had some Bivins Group corporate astroturfers posting here to boost the "Pickens Plan" -- ?? Bivins Group behind the "Pickens Plan"

[TheDude]

If we had paid trolls then they're still around - don't recall anybody coming out strong for Pick at the time, having just registered, only to slink back into the murk afterwards. Seems like Boone and his PP went soft after he blew through that $50 million in ads. But who knows? Unless some of you trolls would care to 'fess up? Anybody? Vamypregirl? OF2? Beuler?