Burn, baby, Burn

[Boges]

11 minutes ago, Zeitgeist said:

But abject poverty is rare in the developing world now.  We developed before climate became an issue.   Giving pollution passes to China and India will more than undo any reductions we make. 

That's the challenge. 

But it doesn't mean the First world should just ignore our obligations because societies that were stuck in an Agrarian lifestyle for their existence are just now trying develop using Fossil Fuels. 

Europe and North America seem mostly onboard. Unless populist isolationists take control of the US again. 

 

[Infidel Dog]

15 minutes ago, Boges said:

But it doesn't mean the First world should just ignore our obligations because societies that were stuck in an Agrarian lifestyle for their existence are just now trying develop using Fossil Fuels. 

The post you're replying to was talking about India and China.

Are you pretending to still be talking about India and China or did you move on without telling us?

India and China are every bit as capable as we are of moving on from coal if they want to. The just don't want to. It's easier for them not to while making insignificant gestures pretending they are moving on from coal...except they're not and there's coal dust in the Arctic every year attesting to that.

Edited August 17, 2021 by Infidel Dog

[Boges]

7 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

The post you're replying to was talking about India and China.

Are you pretending to still be talking about India and China or did you move on without telling us?

India and China are every bit as capable as we are of moving on from coal if they want to. The just don't want to. It's easier for them not to while making insignificant gestures pretending they are moving on from coal...except they're not and there's coal dust in the Arctic every year attesting to that.

Not sure about India. 

China is investing heavily in Green on the home front. But with Road and Belt they're still bringing Fossil Fuels to the developed world. We in the west do it too by exporting Coal, Crude and LNG. 

Moving past fossil fuel for electricity is something the developed world is well on our way to achieving. Canada already uses renewables and low carbon solutions for a good majority of our Hydro. 

Our challenge it to move away from Carbon for transportation. 

[Zeitgeist]

1 hour ago, Yzermandius19 said:

cougar will only believe the "science" when it claims the sky is falling because of humans destroying the environment and the only answer to that problem that cougar will accept is central planning that controls the behavior of others

anyone who does not parrot that narrative is a "denier"

the climate doom cult cannot be reasoned with

The problem with her reasoning is the same fallacy that’s common in media today.  Our existence is a carbon footprint and just about everything we do uses energy, whether in the food we eat or the heat we use in our homes.  Sure we can shave a few percent off here and there, but neither Cougar nor anyone else who screams the sky is falling will radically change their lifestyle.  We have to be honest about what we can handle.

Edited August 17, 2021 by Zeitgeist

[Infidel Dog]

Here's something you might find interesting if you can past the fact it's published at WattsUP, Boges:

"

Michael Tamvakis, City, University of London

It is only a few days since the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) signalled the dire consequences of human-induced climate change. At the heart of this stark warning by UN Secretary General António Guterres and the scientists behind the report was the urgent need to heavily reduce coal in the energy mix.

Yet in the run-up to publication, and absent from mainstream news headlines, was the steady ascent of coal prices, past US$100 (£72) per metric tonne in June and then past US$130 in mid-July to over US$170 today. This is almost four times the price last September.

The rise in prices can be attributed squarely to a resurgence of demand after the depths of the pandemic – especially in emerging Asian markets such as China and India, but also in Japan, South Korea, Europe and the US. Electricity demand, which remains closely linked to coal, is expected to have increased by 5% across 2021 and a further 4% in 2022.

 

On the supply side, there are also some issues such as China being unable to acquire coal from Australia due to an import ban, and smaller disruptions in the export output of major producers Indonesia, South Africa and Russia. But there are no long-term supply issues, as the main producing countries have not curtailed their production or export capacity. Prices should not therefore stay high for very long.

The revival of world demand for energy hopefully means the world economy is recovering from the pandemic, but the surge in coal prices is a reminder of how energy still relies on fossil fuels. Global energy consumption totalled 556 exajoules in 2020, and oil, coal and natural gas accounting for 31%, 27% and 25% of the total respectively. That adds up to more than four-fifths of the total..."

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/17/the-coal-price-has-skyrocketed-in-2021-what-does-it-mean-for-net-zero/

Feel free to prove anything he said there incorrect though. Sounds about right to me.

 

[Boges]

22 minutes ago, Infidel Dog said:

Here's something you might find interesting if you can past the fact it's published at WattsUP, Boges:

"

Michael Tamvakis, City, University of London

It is only a few days since the latest report from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) signalled the dire consequences of human-induced climate change. At the heart of this stark warning by UN Secretary General António Guterres and the scientists behind the report was the urgent need to heavily reduce coal in the energy mix.

Yet in the run-up to publication, and absent from mainstream news headlines, was the steady ascent of coal prices, past US$100 (£72) per metric tonne in June and then past US$130 in mid-July to over US$170 today. This is almost four times the price last September.

The rise in prices can be attributed squarely to a resurgence of demand after the depths of the pandemic – especially in emerging Asian markets such as China and India, but also in Japan, South Korea, Europe and the US. Electricity demand, which remains closely linked to coal, is expected to have increased by 5% across 2021 and a further 4% in 2022.

On the supply side, there are also some issues such as China being unable to acquire coal from Australia due to an import ban, and smaller disruptions in the export output of major producers Indonesia, South Africa and Russia. But there are no long-term supply issues, as the main producing countries have not curtailed their production or export capacity. Prices should not therefore stay high for very long.

The revival of world demand for energy hopefully means the world economy is recovering from the pandemic, but the surge in coal prices is a reminder of how energy still relies on fossil fuels. Global energy consumption totalled 556 exajoules in 2020, and oil, coal and natural gas accounting for 31%, 27% and 25% of the total respectively. That adds up to more than four-fifths of the total..."

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2021/08/17/the-coal-price-has-skyrocketed-in-2021-what-does-it-mean-for-net-zero/

Feel free to prove anything he said there incorrect though. Sounds about right to me.

I would have to know what the benchmark for Coal is to know if the price is due to coal returning to the mean or demand that is more than its ever been. 

I don't question that a vast portion of the world doesn't use clean energy for their electricity. But that, kind of, has to change. 

Moving to from Coal and Oil to LNG is a start. And also a big boon to Canada. 

If Climate Change is a real threat, it'll be these parts of the world with poor infrastructure that bear the brunt of the catastrophe. 

Sitting here in temperate Southern Ontario, I don't fear food shortages, drought, fire, poor air condition, energy insecurity or extreme heat. I guess the biggest threat would be mass migration to these parts of the world when/if other portions become uninhabitable. 

 

Edited August 17, 2021 by Boges

[myata]

11 hours ago, cougar said:

Yep.  Just received a letter from O'Tool. In it, he goes about how he wants to revive the "traditional Canadian industries like oil and gas, forestry, fishing and mining".

That's why it's futile to torment yourself which head to support, red one or blue one. It's not about which can make meaningful change, neither is about any change but how to get in that chair from which they can rule without any checks or limits.

We used to talk about lesser evil, but we may be entering into the territory where there isn't lesser ones, as all are one and the same.

[Infidel Dog]

41 minutes ago, Boges said:

I would have to know what the benchmark for Coal is to know if the price is due to coal returning to the mean or demand that is more than its ever been. 

Try this one then:

Quote

BEIJING, Jan 18 (Reuters) - China's coal output rose last year to its highest since 2015, despite Beijing's climate change pledge to reduce consumption of the dirty fossil fuel and months of disruption at major coal mining hubs.

https://www.nasdaq.com/articles/chinas-2020-coal-output-rises-to-highest-since-2015-undermining-climate-pledges-2021-01-17

I'm on board with you that China and India might want to move on to LNG (if only to clear the skies of black smoke in their industrial areas) but please lay off that "agrarian societies" BS. I don't need a chuckle that bad.

Edited August 17, 2021 by Infidel Dog

[Yzermandius19]

3 hours ago, Boges said:

That's the point. 

They kind of need to leap frog that portion of development for this to work. They'll need the first world's help. 

there are no shortcuts

first world help or no first world help

hence this is doomed to fail

wishful thinking is a helluva drug

 

you can speed up the process but leapfrogging isn't gonna happen

in the meantime the developed world cutting it's own throat to virtue signal how green they are does no one any good

Edited August 17, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[cannuck]

Let's get a few things straight:

Carbon emissions are NOT our problem, the inability for the ocean to absorb them IS.   If we don't fix the ocean's problems (killing off plankton at a rate of about 1% a year over the past several decades) in another 30 years or so we will be past the "tipping point" of the very start of the entire food chain.  This is largely a product of plastic waste hitting the oceans and the inability and even lack of any desire of world governments to be able to regulate, control and enforce pollution control outside of their domestic boundaries.  If we let that happen, literally nothing else we do will matter at all.

Further: this idiotic BS of trying to use electric cars that ALL run on lithium ion batteries - an EXTREMELY polluting and dangerous technology.  So, let's virtue signal about a very small change in carbon emissions (as much of the power for electric transportation will still have direct and indirect carbon emissions to accommodate the HUGE increase in infrastructure that would be needed) while polluting the SHIT out of the planet with lithium mining and battery manufacture and disposal.

Also: China is hardly a third world economy.  It is the second largest economy on the planet by most measures, but by a country mile THE largest when it comes to actual wealth creation.  They actually DO have environmental regulations and plans, but they are following the exact same path of development (exploiting cheap hydrocarbons to meet a developing need at a rate far, far greater than the West ever had) as every other G7 economy has done.   As they have done with manufacturing, telecommunications, science, aviation, etc. they will leapfrog from the dark ages of a few decades ago directly to having mass produced, sub-critical mass gas cooled small and widely distributed reactors - unencumbered by the cold war nonsense of building reactors who's real purpose was to produce weapons grade materials.

Two other things about China:  they pretty much CONTROL most of the lithium supplies and battery production on the planet and will profit handsomely from further polluting the world by accommodating the absolute stupidity of the Euroweenies and the half-wit looney left that will follow them blindly into a future that will destroy the planet.  The other thing is that the LARGEST and underlying problem above all else is over-population - and it is China and China alone that have made any conscious effort to control their population growth.

When I see even a tiny glimmer of intelligent thought never mind smart action from the so-called "green" movement, I will fall over with total (and I guarantee you never-to-happen) surprise.

Edited August 18, 2021 by cannuck

[cougar]

14 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

And what more do you propose to do?  With air travel down some 80%, fewer cars on the road, and in-person patronization of businesses down to 50% in many jurisdictions, we’re already quite shut down.  Pipelines are cleaner means of transporting oil but those are being canceled in favour of importation from undemocratic countries.   Basically we’ve veered into fascistic top-down control of human behaviour that is shifting from fighting one disease to fighting climate change.  Carbon taxes are climbing, housing prices are out of control, and 20,000 more political refugees are coming from Afghanistan.   Perhaps forests are burning at a greater rate than average, but our society has broken down in unprecedented ways and there isn’t much left to cut out of people’s lives or more taxes and costs to raise without destroying what remains of an economy and society that took tens of thousands of years to build.   How much more of a reset do you want?   We’re already living a kind of Jonestown mass suicide by a thousand cuts.

Sorry but what you tell me is not the case.  I did not see any reduction in the number of traffic on my highways; there is actually an increase in heavy traffic which is two or three fold, maybe quadrupled.  No noticeable reduction in air traffic - went hiking and had at least 4 planes disturb me when I was in the alpine.  Helicopters too are popping up in all kinds of remote and impossible places - everyone is in a hurry to invade, take, destroy, pollute.

The carbon taxes and property prices are scams - Canadian style.  Ban foreign ownership of land and stop immigration then see if the market will not correct itself pretty quickly. 

Yes, Afghans will be coming because Canada uses every possible political or natural disaster as means to further inflate its population.  It is not to help people; it is done to satisfy the capitalist agenda of constant growth, which now we see is becoming impossible.

"economy and society that took tens of thousands of years to build" ??????    Have no idea what you are even talking about here. The continent existed and was rich in life for probably millions of years.  Your ancestors showed up here uninvited some 300 years ago; started to build the bright future and this is where we are now - forests, wildlife, fish, insects, plants - all decimated ; climate destroyed.  Don't even try to talk about "building".

[cougar]

8 hours ago, Zeitgeist said:

 Sure we can shave a few percent off here and there, but neither Cougar nor anyone else who scre.We have to be honest about what we can handle.

I don't have to,because I have already done what I can and have been doing it for decades!

[Yzermandius19]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

I don't have to,because I have already done what I can and have been doing it for decades!

rules for thee and not for me

typical of the cult of climate doom

one of the many reasons y'all are never taken as seriously as you wish you were

forcing others to behave the way you demand is prioritized above the environment

fake environmentalist is fake

Edited August 18, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[Zeitgeist]

3 hours ago, cougar said:

Sorry but what you tell me is not the case.  I did not see any reduction in the number of traffic on my highways; there is actually an increase in heavy traffic which is two or three fold, maybe quadrupled.  No noticeable reduction in air traffic - went hiking and had at least 4 planes disturb me when I was in the alpine.  Helicopters too are popping up in all kinds of remote and impossible places - everyone is in a hurry to invade, take, destroy, pollute.

The carbon taxes and property prices are scams - Canadian style.  Ban foreign ownership of land and stop immigration then see if the market will not correct itself pretty quickly. 

Yes, Afghans will be coming because Canada uses every possible political or natural disaster as means to further inflate its population.  It is not to help people; it is done to satisfy the capitalist agenda of constant growth, which now we see is becoming impossible.

"economy and society that took tens of thousands of years to build" ??????    Have no idea what you are even talking about here. The continent existed and was rich in life for probably millions of years.  Your ancestors showed up here uninvited some 300 years ago; started to build the bright future and this is where we are now - forests, wildlife, fish, insects, plants - all decimated ; climate destroyed.  Don't even try to talk about "building".

And?   You never had it so good.  Actually not true.  2019 was the last great year.  

[Yzermandius19]

8 hours ago, cougar said:

Sorry but what you tell me is not the case.  I did not see any reduction in the number of traffic on my highways; there is actually an increase in heavy traffic which is two or three fold, maybe quadrupled.  No noticeable reduction in air traffic - went hiking and had at least 4 planes disturb me when I was in the alpine.  Helicopters too are popping up in all kinds of remote and impossible places - everyone is in a hurry to invade, take, destroy, pollute.

The carbon taxes and property prices are scams - Canadian style.  Ban foreign ownership of land and stop immigration then see if the market will not correct itself pretty quickly. 

Yes, Afghans will be coming because Canada uses every possible political or natural disaster as means to further inflate its population.  It is not to help people; it is done to satisfy the capitalist agenda of constant growth, which now we see is becoming impossible.

"economy and society that took tens of thousands of years to build" ??????    Have no idea what you are even talking about here. The continent existed and was rich in life for probably millions of years.  Your ancestors showed up here uninvited some 300 years ago; started to build the bright future and this is where we are now - forests, wildlife, fish, insects, plants - all decimated ; climate destroyed.  Don't even try to talk about "building".

the natives destroyed the environment too

at least now the America's are much wealthier than before

instead of the worst of both worlds

Edited August 18, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

It does not matter. Everybody has their reasons and excuses when the smell of the buck's in the air. Third world has reasons, as the first one does (look at this country's "progress" since first days of Kyoto). Everyone witnesses the bonfire, and everyone points fingers at each other.

[Yzermandius19]

5 minutes ago, myata said:

It does not matter. Everybody has their reasons and excuses when the smell of the buck's in the air. Third world has reasons, as the first one does (look at this country's "progress" since first days of Kyoto). Everyone witnesses the bonfire, and everyone points fingers at each other.

the sky ain't falling

it's a candle, not a bonfire

[myata]

There's only one (as is becoming clear) way to find out. And we're on the way there (quite possibly, one way).

[betsy]

On 8/13/2021 at 1:14 AM, cougar said:

We kept on building that bright future - one parking lot at a time, one estate at a time, a bridge here, another one there, doubling highways and pipelines, constantly building new ones, "harvesting" the forests, wildlife and fish in the most "sustainable" ways.  We went "green" many years ago.  We had habitat conservation organizations in place since the beginning of last century, when most wildlife populations were still in decent shape and most of the forests were still there.

They are not there any more!

But we hear our leaders will "act" as they take climate change "seriously". 

No they will not. They never have and never will.

Fighting a wildfire also has its environmental impacts - fossil fuels are burnt , which again contribute to the burning of the fires, warming up the atmosphere and creating more extreme events down the road.  The burnt structures and equipment will need to be replaced - again new damage to the environment as new trees need to be removed and new mines developed to produce what was destroyed. 

But those events become more frequent and more extreme, with heavier damages and the need to spend more time, effort and do more damage to replace what was lost.  A vicious circle of which our stupid mankind will not recover.

So, unlike most, I kind of welcome the damage and smoke.  I hope those affect the bigger cities, where the millions of consumers and politicians are hiding and talking about conservation while hoping things will continue the way they were in the foreseeable for them future.

This song is from 1971.  Just imagine the impacts our mankind has had on the environment since then!

 

 

 

 

Of course they're not serious!   It's only the little people who's supposed to be doing what's allegedly supposed to be done to save the planet.  In the meantime, the wealthy couldn't wait to get on with spcae tourism!   That'll be the next elite status signalling.

 

Why should I take this so-called, CODE RED seriously? Some say it's irreversible - others say, there is still time!   Really?

Face the inevitable:  the planet will go through its cycle. 

Whether it happens in this lifetime or not - we'll just have to wait and see.

Edited August 18, 2021 by betsy

[Zeitgeist]

The environmentalists will continue to take their private jets and yachts to meetings to discuss the sacrifices the Canadian masses should make to save the planet, as China rolls out coal generating stations like wallpaper.  All that happens is we pay more for fuel and we offshore energy production, manufacturing, and jobs to the least regulated countries with the lowest wages and environmental standards so we can say our domestic emissions have dropped.  Of course our 10 percent reduction is overwhelmed by China and India’s 10% increase.  When anyone complains, trot out images of Lytton, BC and Greta...

Edited August 18, 2021 by Zeitgeist

[August1991]

On 8/17/2021 at 8:17 AM, myata said:

I'd love to be optimistic and positive just don't see where it would come from, not today at least. In this country we had a tiny 20 million population with the resources of the half of the world, abundant everything. If sustainable, prosperous humanity is ever possible, where else it could be tried, to show an example?

Nope. Cut, cut, cut, fish, fish, fish, drain, drain, drain, kill, kill, kill as fast as possible, markets won't wait! Will there ever be enough? Keep dreaming.

,,,

Myata, you suffer from zero-sum thinking.

You think that if someone takes a fish or cuts a tree, there is less fish/tree for anyone else.

I have a different view of life. We can find more oil.

=====

True, Canada once had only 20 million. IMHO, we could easily have 100 million or more. 

[myata]

9 hours ago, August1991 said:

Myata, you suffer from zero-sum thinking.

You think that if someone takes a fish or cuts a tree, there is less fish/tree for anyone else.

That concept indeed applies to our natural environment. It's not infinite, and every time we take from it without returning it to the previous, pristine state it diminishes. We can find more oil, but we cannot restore 1/3 of species that are lost. We can have some many more millions, but at the expense of losing more forests. Just because we haven't learned any different. Because never had time, too busy, cut, cut, cut....

[Yzermandius19]

2 hours ago, myata said:

That concept indeed applies to our natural environment. It's not infinite, and every time we take from it without returning it to the previous, pristine state it diminishes. We can find more oil, but we cannot restore 1/3 of species that are lost. We can have some many more millions, but at the expense of losing more forests. Just because we haven't learned any different. Because never had time, too busy, cut, cut, cut....

false dichotomy

the species was more rapacious of the environment when it was poorer

you can see this even today, as the poor nations have the worst environmental records and the wealthy nations have the best environmental records

a healthy economy and a healthier environment go hand in hand

those who think the only way to help the environment is to hurt the economy are fake environmentalists

they care more about damaging the economy than helping the environment, neo-luddites

they cloak their hatred of humanity thriving in environmentalism, to try and sell their bullshit to the masses

but the people aren't buying it

 

wise up, myata

obvious scam is obvious

if you really care about the environment

don't buy into the scam

zero-sum thinking is for Malthusian suckers

Edited August 19, 2021 by Yzermandius19

[myata]

22 minutes ago, Yzermandius19 said:

don't buy into the scam

There's that point of view that something (especially not of my liking) does not exist unless it smacks me and squarely on the head. iPhone in the hand but conclusions of science must be wrong because it's not hitting us on the head (yet) and squarely. For this argument, there's only one way to find out: either it's taken all the way to the logical end and something happens, as predicted by science; or nothing happens. And there's no way of knowing for certain, with 100% certainty able to convince everybody, till the end is reached.

[Yzermandius19]

12 minutes ago, myata said:

There's that point of view that something (especially not of my liking) does not exist unless it smacks me and squarely on the head. iPhone in the hand but conclusions of science must be wrong because it's not hitting us on the head (yet) and squarely. For this argument, there's only one way to find out: either it's taken all the way to the logical end and something happens, as predicted by science; or nothing happens. And there's no way of knowing for certain, with 100% certainty able to convince everybody, till the end is reached.

that's all part of the scam

claim that if we don't destroy the economy

the world will end

invoking disaster to sell nonesense

because if you don't listen to the nonsense

the sky will fall

using the fear of doomsday is the only way to sell it

without the doomsday

no one will buy into the centrally planned boondoggles

being proposed as the only "solution"

obvious scam is obvious

those who fall for it

are total rubes

Edited August 19, 2021 by Yzermandius19