Jump to content

Just how pointless and stupid our climate reductions efforts are


I am Groot

Recommended Posts

The bad climate news never stops these days:
 

Quote

This year's wildfire season is the worst on record in Canada, with some 76,000 square kilometres (29,000 square miles) burning across eastern and western Canada. That's greater than the combined area burned in 2016, 2019, 2020 and 2022, according to the Canadian Interagency Forest Fire Centre.

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/canadian-wildfire-emissions-reach-record-high-2023-2023-06-27/

That’s an area greater than New Brunswick! What’s Canada going to be like to live in? The strategy we should adopt to combat AGW is a political matter immune to consensus but I marvel at how there are people out there, some of them Canadians covered in soot, who still dispute its reality. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/9792167/air-quality-warning-quebec-fires/

 

 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Whatever about climate change itself, we are going to have to make a much bigger effort to limit these wildfires and the horrible smoke they produce. I’d say the Americans would quieten down on our NATO contribution if we were seen to be doing everything we could on this issue. It has the potential to affect quality of life in the continent. 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/24/2023 at 8:38 AM, SpankyMcFarland said:

Smoke from Quebec has put Newfoundland in a dusky haze for a few days now. The sunsets are pretty, other consequences less so. After being outside for an hour I noticed my iPad was covered in soot. 

There should be a new word created for fires of this magnitude. I propose we call these new, large fires out in the forest "forest fires", because they're in the forest and they're forest-sized. 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada's forestry management needs to be put under scrutiny.

When you plant only one type or species due to its economic value and remove the "junk" trees like aspen, birch and poplars, there are consequences. These soft woods hold a lot more moisture and play a role in slowing down the spread of forest fires.

"The physical properties of aspen resist intense fire behaviour; high crown base height, higher moisture content of the leaves and stems, and tight, smooth bark. Since the characteristics of these trees do not readily support fast-moving wildfires, they make ideal species to plant in and around FireSmart communities."

https://www1.agric.gov.ab.ca/$department/deptdocs.nsf/all/formain15744/$FILE/tree-species-impact-wildfire-aug03-2012.pdf

 

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

A basic point. Over recent decades the number of fires hasn’t increased but their extent and severity certainly has. A national firefighting service is one reform needed. A few other suggestions

Quote

Experts say improved fire management through, for instance, allowing some fires to burn, and increasing the number of prescribed burns (such as Indigenous cultural burns), would help reduce the number of out-of-control, large-scale fires.

An increased emphasis on community-level fire safety, and better oversight of what kind of trees are planted (some better resist, or recover from, fires for instance) would also help. 

"That kind of approach will help us reduce the area that a fire can burn," said Copes-Gerbitz.


https://www.cbc.ca/news/climate/canada-wildfire-data-change-1.6854186

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The permanently Liberal government will keep regulating and taxing and ratcheting up the climate change fear rhetoric until Canadians who are already stretched financially and experiencing a major decline in living standards finally break.  None of this “action” will make any meaningful change to our climate, but even fewer people will be able to afford to buy a home or enjoy anywhere near the living standards associated with the Canada of several years ago.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 6/27/2023 at 11:53 PM, SpankyMcFarland said:

The bad climate news never stops these days:
 

https://www.reuters.com/sustainability/canadian-wildfire-emissions-reach-record-high-2023-2023-06-27/

That’s an area greater than New Brunswick! What’s Canada going to be like to live in? The strategy we should adopt to combat AGW is a political matter immune to consensus but I marvel at how there are people out there, some of them Canadians covered in soot, who still dispute its reality. 

https://globalnews.ca/news/9792167/air-quality-warning-quebec-fires/

 

 

They also said that 70 % of all these fires where the result of humans... not climate change as you suggest, it is about careless people doing stupid shit, and today we have a lot of stupid people...

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

43 minutes ago, Army Guy said:

They also said that 70 % of all these fires where the result of humans... not climate change as you suggest, it is about careless people doing stupid shit, and today we have a lot of stupid people...

People are going to start fires no matter what we do. However, once a forest fire starts, its progress depends on many factors including how dry the forest is, how warm the air is and wind speeds. All of these can be increased by climate change. In addition, megafires now create their own weather and these fire clouds can produce multiple lightning strikes that start new fires.

https://thehill.com/changing-america/sustainability/environment/564216-wildfires-can-actually-create-their-own-weather/

We are facing a dimmed future in Canada. 

Edited by SpankyMcFarland
Link to comment
Share on other sites

16 hours ago, Army Guy said:

They also said that 70 % of all these fires where the result of humans... not climate change as you suggest, it is about careless people doing stupid shit, and today we have a lot of stupid people...

Not that i'm a big fan of the 'forest fires are climate change' argument, but it's not the number of fires. And around 70 percent are ALWAYS caused by humans, that's not new.

It's the intensity and size of them and how fast they spread that's new.  it's like we used to have 10 fires that were each 10 hectares, now we have 10 fires but it's 100 hectares each and they burn for months.

I think 'climate change' makes it really easy for gov'ts to blame SERIOUSLY bad forest practices on something other than themselves. Whether or not climate change is at fault, there's NO doubt that changes need to be made by the gov'ts and people are not holding them to account on that because we're letting them say 'climate change' and then shrugging.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

I think 'climate change' makes it really easy for gov'ts to blame SERIOUSLY bad forest practices on something other than themselves. Whether or not climate change is at fault, there's NO doubt that changes need to be made by the gov'ts and people are not holding them to account on that because we're letting them say 'climate change' and then shrugging.

Yeah well I remember people saying we needed to change how we do things by holding big forest companies and governments to better account decades ago. Of course then it was only lefties and environmentalists doing that so...commies....shrug...

Doing that was even easier. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, eyeball said:

Yeah well I remember people saying we needed to change how we do things by holding big forest companies and governments to better account decades ago. Of course then it was only lefties and environmentalists doing that so...commies....shrug...

Nope.  Sorry - and this is why nobody trusts what the left says. The constant lying.

In fact in bc most of those arguments happened in the 90's, during the ndp's time.  And more recently again, but the ndp has been in power for 7 years and done nothing despite the fact they have admitted the fires are getting worse.

And when the ndp  was in gov't in alberta they cut forest fire spending. That's when fort mcmurrey burned down.

What the left said was " Forest fires are getting worse so we should do something about climate change to fix that”. They didn't want any money spent on addressing the forests. THey didn't care about 'adapting' or preventing fires.  No no - they wanted a CARBON TAX - yes!!!! THAT will stop forest fires!!!

But it didn't.

The right has been screaming for many years about how we need to worry about adapting more than anything else especially considering what a small amount of carbon we produce.  But the left ignores - and you can't get elected in canada without bowing to the climate change and carbon tax gods that the left have erected.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

Nope.  Sorry - and this is why nobody trusts what the left says. The constant lying.

In fact in bc most of those arguments happened in the 90's, during the ndp's time.  And more recently again, but the ndp has been in power for 7 years and done nothing despite the fact they have admitted the fires are getting worse.

And when the ndp  was in gov't in alberta they cut forest fire spending. That's when fort mcmurrey burned down.

It's interesting that when I mention holding governments to account you immediately wave a left wing government in my face as if I'm only interested in holding right wing governments to account.

As I've often said, one of the main reasons I want to monitor governments to an extent that Orwell himself would blush is to ensure when 'my' guy/gal gets in we might be able to prevent him/her from cocking things up with corruption or incomepetence. This is the best way to prevent 'your' guy/gal from getting in you see.

I know you'll never admit to it but that's probably the best reason you'll ever have for allowing governments and corporations to keep to their safe spaces away from the public.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Just now, eyeball said:

It's interesting that when I mention holding governments to account you immediately wave a left wing government in my face as if I'm only interested in holding right wing governments to account.

It's interesting you'd say that after i replied to your comment that ONLY THE LEFT WAS INTERESTED IN ADDRESSING THE ISSUE - and when i point out they DIDN"T...  suddenly you're butthurt.

You were the one who made the claim - i just disproved it.

Quote

As I've often said, one of the main reasons I want to monitor governments to an extent that Orwell himself would blush is to ensure when 'my' guy/gal gets in we might be able to prevent him/her from cocking things up with corruption or incomepetence.

There's no 'monitoring' issue here - the left didn't even call for it. The left WANTED the gov't to go after carbon taxes and climate change RATHER THAN addressing forestry issues.  So 'monitoring' wasn't an issue.

Quote

This is the best way to prevent 'your' guy/gal from getting in you see.

I think if people had a full view of what the gov'ts did - we'd never see another left wing gov't again.

Quote

I know you'll never admit to it but that's probably the best reason you'll ever have for allowing governments and corporations to keep to their safe spaces away from the public.  

It was literally your gov't that effed up the forest situation we're talking about.  And your gov't who right now is doing nothing about it federally despite having been in power for 7 years.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

17 hours ago, Army Guy said:

They also said that 70 % of all these fires where the result of humans... not climate change as you suggest, it is about careless people doing stupid shit, and today we have a lot of stupid people...

NO! It's space lasers starting the fires.   :)

https://thenarwhal.ca/wildfire-canada-explainer/

  • Haha 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, CdnFox said:

The left WANTED the gov't to go after carbon taxes and climate change RATHER THAN addressing forestry issues.

Not me. I figured the best way to address forestry issues was, you guessed it, getting between forestry lobbyists and government managers.

Quote

I think if people had a full view of what the gov'ts did - we'd never see another left wing gov't again.

Suire, bring it on, lets see what you got.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Nefarious Banana said:

eyeball & cougar . . . . . wet spots of 'happiness' in their clothing, now pass the blame onto the forest industry.

What about CdnFox, he's blaming the forest industry too, finally.

Does that make him a lefty with a wet spot too?

1 hour ago, Nefarious Banana said:

How's fishing eyeball?  

Caught the last one yet?

No, they got lobbied/allocated to other fishing interests with deeper pockets and better lobbyists than I can afford.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, eyeball said:

Not me. I figured the best way to address forestry issues was, you guessed it, getting between forestry lobbyists and government managers.

 

Well the left didn't - guess you'll be wanting to switch to the right now :)

Quote

Suire, bring it on, lets see what you got.

From the left? Including you? Sure ...  lets see.... lies, lies, lies, deflection, denial, lies, lies, lies, selling us to other countries, massive taxes and deficits, pretending to care about the environment while doing nothing, lies, turning people against each other to exploit them for votes, lies...  actually it goes on like this for quite some time :) 

54 minutes ago, eyeball said:

What about CdnFox, he's blaming the forest industry too, finally.

Again - you have to lie. I did not blame the forest industry at all. Post where i said that.  I blamed the gov't for it's forestry practices and firefighting practices.

IT's bad enough when you lie TO me, do you have to lie ABOUT me to @Nefarious Banana as well?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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.

Guest
Unfortunately, your content contains terms that we do not allow. Please edit your content to remove the highlighted words below.
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.


  • Tell a friend

    Love Repolitics.com - Political Discussion Forums? Tell a friend!
  • Member Statistics

    • Total Members
      10,692
    • Most Online
      1,403

    Newest Member
    Gator
    Joined
  • Recent Achievements

    • Gator went up a rank
      Contributor
    • Gator went up a rank
      Explorer
    • Fracnsis Moore earned a badge
      One Month Later
    • Gator went up a rank
      Apprentice
    • admined earned a badge
      One Month Later
  • Recently Browsing

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...