waldingoman Posted October 17, 2014 Report Posted October 17, 2014 It was an excuse. Denialists are always full of excuses. So full of them their eyes are brown. Quote
waldingoman Posted October 17, 2014 Report Posted October 17, 2014 One point that alarmists keep ignoring: "developing" countries have benefited enormously from the CO2 emissions in the developed world that led to the creation of markets, capital and technology which they depend on to develop their economy today. Without those developed world emissions for 100+ years China would still be a nation of farmers. IOW - the idea that developed countries have some "debt" to pay for past emissions is nonsense. Those countries do not benefit from the heritage of colonilasm. Quote
jbg Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) China and the U.S. have reached a new "deal" regarding omissions according to this New York Times article (link). This one not only ratifies China's high emissions which are the subject of the thread but allows their unlimited growth till 2030 This is a new low in the Obama's administration. Obama has made what would be a "binding pledge for the U.S. to reduce emissions 26-28% below 2005 levels by 2025, in exchange for........drum roll........China promising to plateau its emissions by 2030. First of all, it commits the U.S. to "go first," a grave mistake when dealing with China. You can be sure that the U.S.'s free press will vigorously force the enforcement of this deal. How much pressure will China's supine and controlled press give? Second of all I don't' see any limits on how high China can push emissions. This marks an abject surrender by Obama. Disgusting picture of celebration of vivisection of the U.S.below: Edited November 12, 2014 by jbg Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Mighty AC Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 This is a fantastic move. China is committing to produce 20% of its energy from zero emission sources by 2030. That means China will be adding the equivalent of the entire US energy production capacity, in emission free energy sources in just 15 years. That is an amazing pace! http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2014/11/12/3591284/us-china-climate-deal/ For its part, China is committing to get 20 percent of its energy from non-fossil-fuel sources by 2030, and to peak its overall carbon dioxide emissions that same year. China’s construction of renewable energy capacity is already proceeding at a furious pace, and this deal will require the country to deploy an additional 800 to 1,000 gigawatts of zero-carbon energy by 2030. For comparison, 800 to 1,000 gigawatts is close to the amount of electricity the U.S. current generates from all sources combined. Quote "Our lives begin to end the day we stay silent about the things that matter." - Martin Luther King Jr"Those who can make you believe absurdities, can make you commit atrocities" - Voltaire
TimG Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) This is a fantastic move. China is committing to produce 20% of its energy from zero emission sources by 2030.The main difference between China and the US is China will do this with nuclear which means they have a chance of meeting this target. Emissions reductions in any country where nuclear is kept off the table are a complete waste of time and money (i.e. the US will fail to meet its targets - 100% guarantee). Edited November 12, 2014 by TimG Quote
cybercoma Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 The US will fail because the Republicans won't honour them. Quote
TimG Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 (edited) The US will fail because the Republicans won't honour them.All republicans are doing is acknowledging what everyone with a brain knows: emissions reduction promises that depend on deployment of useless technologies like solar and wind are a futile waste of money. Now if the democrats started arguing that the US needed to build nuclear plants as fast as possible then they could argue that the actually cared about CO2. As its stands, the democrats clearly don't give a damn about CO2 and are only posturing. Edited November 12, 2014 by TimG Quote
jbg Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 The US will fail because the Republicans won't honour them. How can any republican personally promise to exhale 26-28% less CO2 by 2025? Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
bush_cheney2004 Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 The US will fail because the Republicans won't honour them. Just like the Liberals in Canada...massive Kyoto FAIL !!! Quote Economics trumps Virtue.
On Guard for Thee Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 How can any republican personally promise to exhale 26-28% less CO2 by 2025? Once again, exhaling less doesn't help. Quote
On Guard for Thee Posted November 12, 2014 Report Posted November 12, 2014 Just like the Liberals in Canada...massive Kyoto FAIL !!! You are aware we have had a Conservative gov. here for the last 9 year? And with a leader who has gutted funding to science and follows a religion that claims that the environment is best left in Gods hands.. Quote
TimG Posted November 13, 2014 Report Posted November 13, 2014 A good article showing how China conceded nothing (its targets simply represent the natural evolution of its economy) but managed to secure concessions from a lame duck president who agreed that China should do absolutely nothing while the US wasted billions trying to reduce emissions without using the only viable emissions free technology (nuclear) http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/11/12/climatechange-china-usa-kemp-idUKL6N0T22IU20141112 Quote
Keepitsimple Posted November 16, 2014 Report Posted November 16, 2014 A good article showing how China conceded nothing (its targets simply represent the natural evolution of its economy) but managed to secure concessions from a lame duck president who agreed that China should do absolutely nothing while the US wasted billions trying to reduce emissions without using the only viable emissions free technology (nuclear) http://uk.reuters.com/article/2014/11/12/climatechange-china-usa-kemp-idUKL6N0T22IU20141112 Infuriating.....and a continued example of how Obama is so beholden to Environmental money. Big Green. The eco-dupes are so blinded by an ideology that they refuse to recognize that their is no such thing as "Big Oil". Those companies are not Oil companies - they are energy companies. They don't care where the money comes from. If Green technology ever becomes economically feasible, these same energy companies will make a strategic shift in their business plans to incorporate a volume switch to green energy. Until then, we'll just continue to see a limited move to green energy to ensure all the subsidies are sucked out of governments. Quote Back to Basics
jbg Posted November 16, 2014 Report Posted November 16, 2014 Those companies are not Oil companies - they are energy companies. They don't care where the money comes from. If Green technology ever becomes economically feasible, these same energy companies will make a strategic shift in their business plans to incorporate a volume switch to green energy. Until then, we'll just continue to see a limited move to green energy to ensure all the subsidies are sucked out of governments. Great point. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
Shady Posted November 16, 2014 Report Posted November 16, 2014 Obama's agreed to hamstring American manufacturing, which is a direct attack on the middle class and good wages. But when you lose your job and need to apply for a minimum wage job, it might be a dollar an hour more than it is now. Cause he cares about the middle class! Unfortunately his policies don't. Add the fact that he's about to nationalize over 4 million illegal immigrants, that will only further depress wages, you're looking at an abysmal situation for middle class workers. And climate change is such an urgent and important issue, that China has 15 years before it has to even begin slowing emissions, while we need to start immediately! Even though China is the biggest polluter. Quote
jbg Posted November 16, 2014 Report Posted November 16, 2014 Obama's agreed to hamstring American manufacturing, which is a direct attack on the middle class and good wages. But when you lose your job and need to apply for a minimum wage job, it might be a dollar an hour more than it is now. Cause he cares about the middle class! Unfortunately his policies don't. Add the fact that he's about to nationalize over 4 million illegal immigrants, that will only further depress wages, you're looking at an abysmal situation for middle class workers. And climate change is such an urgent and important issue, that China has 15 years before it has to even begin slowing emissions, while we need to start immediately! Even though China is the biggest polluter. Summary, the guy is a loser and a traitor. Quote Free speech: "You can say what you want, but I don't have to lend you my megaphone." Always remember that when you are in the right you can afford to keep your temper, and when you are in the wrong you cannot afford to lose it. - J.J. Reynolds. Will the steps anyone is proposing to fight "climate change" reduce a single temperature, by a single degree, at a single location? The mantra of "world opinion" or the views of the "international community" betrays flabby and weak reasoning (link).
On Guard for Thee Posted November 16, 2014 Report Posted November 16, 2014 Infuriating.....and a continued example of how Obama is so beholden to Environmental money. Big Green. The eco-dupes are so blinded by an ideology that they refuse to recognize that their is no such thing as "Big Oil". Those companies are not Oil companies - they are energy companies. They don't care where the money comes from. If Green technology ever becomes economically feasible, these same energy companies will make a strategic shift in their business plans to incorporate a volume switch to green energy. Until then, we'll just continue to see a limited move to green energy to ensure all the subsidies are sucked out of governments. What kind of dupe doesn't understand big oil? They are oil companies and they will continue to be the source of sequestered CO2 emission until the last barrel is sucked out of the ground and the fossil dupes will stand by and support it. Only then will they become energy companies, assuming we're still able to draw breath on the planet. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted November 17, 2014 Report Posted November 17, 2014 What kind of dupe doesn't understand big oil? They are oil companies and they will continue to be the source of sequestered CO2 emission until the last barrel is sucked out of the ground and the fossil dupes will stand by and support it. Only then will they become energy companies, assuming we're still able to draw breath on the planet. Nope - they are energy companies already - as for taking the last drop of oil out of the ground - there is a price per barrel where it is better business to leave it in the ground. It will take a whole bunch of "Green Energy" to help drive down oil prices. If that time ever starts to show on the distant horizon, you can bet that Oil/Energy companies will be first in line to buy up or start up Green Energy companies. It's not happening anytime soon.... but that's what I mean by eco-dupes. They are so righteously angry at "Big Oil" that they can't see the bigger picture. Quote Back to Basics
On Guard for Thee Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 Nope - they are energy companies already - as for taking the last drop of oil out of the ground - there is a price per barrel where it is better business to leave it in the ground. It will take a whole bunch of "Green Energy" to help drive down oil prices. If that time ever starts to show on the distant horizon, you can bet that Oil/Energy companies will be first in line to buy up or start up Green Energy companies. It's not happening anytime soon.... but that's what I mean by eco-dupes. They are so righteously angry at "Big Oil" that they can't see the bigger picture. Thank you for substantiating my point. You admit they are oil companies, not energy companies. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 Thank you for substantiating my point. You admit they are oil companies, not energy companies. It takes an eco-dupe to arrive at that conclusion. It went completely over your head. Quote Back to Basics
On Guard for Thee Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 It takes an eco-dupe to arrive at that conclusion. It went completely over your head. More like in one ear and out the other. The oil companies will turn to green gold when they see the last bbl of black gold coming. Quote
Keepitsimple Posted November 18, 2014 Report Posted November 18, 2014 (edited) More like in one ear and out the other. The oil companies will turn to green gold when they see the last bbl of black gold coming. For sure - in one ear and out the other.....so I don't expect you to acknowledge this either.....as I said, there is a price-per-barrel where it makes more sense to leave oil in the ground. But the shocker for many is that some of the leaders in green energy development have been oil stocks, such as BP p.l.c. (NYSE/BP). Oil stocks have spent billions of dollars on green energy initiatives. BP, for one, has invested over $7.0 billion since 2005. While some might think this is just a PR stunt, I disagree. The truth is that oil stocks like BP see the potential for large corporate profits over the next century. While corporate profits through oil production have been significant, even firms like BP know there’s a limit to how much they can extract. It’s just common sense to use the corporate profits from oil to develop new green energy sources. Since 2005, the BP Alternative Energy division has grown from just a couple of employees to 5,000 currently. The hunt for corporate profits involves biofuel, wind or solar energy, and any other possible avenue to generate green energy. All of life is based on incentives, and the drive to increase corporate profits is the purest of all. Without this drive, we would be nowhere near as technologically advanced as we are today. Link: http://www.investmentcontrarians.com/stock-market/investing-in-green-energy-through-big-oil/262/ Edited November 18, 2014 by Keepitsimple Quote Back to Basics
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.