Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[dhrivnak]

Well in the first place I didn't say anything about mental illness I said "How can a political movement that has as its current darling a mentally disturbed 16 year old girl expect to attract rational people to its POV?"

Asbergers is in the DSM. It is a mental disturbance. I can change it to "How can a political movement that has as its current darling a 16 year old girl with Asperger's expect to attract rational people to its POV?" or even further to

"How can a political movement that has as its current darling a 16 year old girl expect to attract rational people to its POV?"

If you don't understand why rational people would be put off I can't help you.

I may be one of those who disagreed with you as I thought it was in bad taste calling someone you have never met or talked to, “mentally disturbed “. She is concerned and speaking out how is that bad? It seems like you are the one disturbed by her message.

 

[mspohr]

Divestment works – and one huge bank can lead the way | Bill McKibben

Perhaps the first real test will come on 15 October, when the board of the EU’s European Investment Bank – the largest public bank in the world – meets to decide whether the time has finally come to stop expanding the fossil fuel sector. This should be a no-brainer decision: the bank’s staff has put forward a cogent proposal, supported by campaigners across the continent, that would end loans to new fossil fuel projects by 2020.

And if the EIB does act, it will send a strong signal to markets and to other lenders. For almost a decade now, observers have understood that restricting the flow of money to the fossil fuel industry is a key part of the climate fight. That’s why endowments and portfolios worth more than $11tn have begun divesting their fossil fuel stocks; last month the University of California system became the latest big player to join in, scrubbing its $80bn endowment and pension fund of fossil fuel stocks.

EIB balks under pressure from fossil fuels.

The European Investment Bank (EIB) has balked at a proposal to halt new investments in fossil fuels, raising concerns that Germany and other nations are plotting to water down what would be one of the financial sector’s most ambitious climate moves.

Concerns as EU bank balks at plan to halt fossil fuel investments

Concerns as EU bank balks at plan to halt fossil fuel investments

 

[ggies07]

EIB balks under pressure from fossil fuels.

The European Investment Bank (EIB) has balked at a proposal to halt new investments in fossil fuels, raising concerns that Germany and other nations are plotting to water down what would be one of the financial sector’s most ambitious climate moves.

Concerns as EU bank balks at plan to halt fossil fuel investments

Concerns as EU bank balks at plan to halt fossil fuel investments

 

[S'toon]

t’s no secret that the planet’s ice and snow cover is fast disappearing as a direct result of human-induced climate change. A warming world has led to unprecedented ice loss at the planet’s poles, the untimely deaths of glaciers, and a decline in snowfall. The white frosting atop Mont Blanc, Western Europe’s highest peak, is no exception, as evidenced by new images taken from above.

Mont Blanc straddles the French-Italian border and reaches a height of 4,810 meters (15,780 feet) at its summit. Just recently, Italian officials ordered road closures and evacuations as a glacier pinned to the side of a lower peak in the Mont Blanc massif risks collapse.

A century ago, in 1919, Swiss pilot and photographer Walter Mittelholzer flew over Mont Blanc, photographing the snowy, mountainous view below. Now, Dr Kieran Baxter and Dr Alice Watterson of the University of Dundee have followed in his flight path, taking to the skies to recreate the original images.

The 100-year difference is stark. Snow and ice cover have receded significantly over the past 10 decades, hitting home the fact that the impacts of the climate crisis are well and truly underway.

<snip>

More, photos at:
Depressing Images Reveal Climate Change’s Toll On Mont Blanc's Glaciers Over The Past Century

 

[mspohr]

How do we rein in the fossil fuel industry? Here are eight ideas
Individual action alone won’t solve the climate crisis. So what political changes might help?

Put climate on the ballot paper
End fossil fuel subsidies
Put a price on carbon
Scale back demand for fossil fuels
Roll out large scale carbon capture and storage
Stop flaring
Halt investment in fossil fuels
Establish market metrics on climate change

 

[mspohr]

The Guardian's climate pledge 2019

The Guardian's climate pledge 2019

In April 2019, the Columbia Journalism Review said, 'For some time now, by far the best daily reporting on climate change has come from the Guardian, which covers the science, politics, economics, and health aspects throughout the world with great force and clarity.' We will prioritise and give prominence to environmental journalism from The Guardian and Observer, bringing you the news and information you need. Our reporting on the environment, from our international team, will never be influenced by commercial or political interests and will always be rooted in scientific fact.

 

[SageBrush]

I'm also a fan of the Guardian. It is time for me to take out a subscription

Addendum: Done

This newspaper gets it: "The climate emergency is the defining issue of our times. "

 

[d21mike]

The Guardian's climate pledge 2019

The Guardian's climate pledge 2019

In April 2019, the Columbia Journalism Review said, 'For some time now, by far the best daily reporting on climate change has come from the Guardian, which covers the science, politics, economics, and health aspects throughout the world with great force and clarity.' We will prioritise and give prominence to environmental journalism from The Guardian and Observer, bringing you the news and information you need. Our reporting on the environment, from our international team, will never be influenced by commercial or political interests and will always be rooted in scientific fact.

I found this from the Guardian. Do you agree with this? If so, is there any estimate that ONLY includes the first sentence? The rest of it that creates the total fossil fuel subsidy would not be agreed to by many (regular people) including me. The "usage" of fossil fuels by the "people" is NOT a "fossil fuel subsidy" IMHO.

Most experts define fossil fuel subsidies as financial or tax support for those buying fuel or the companies producing it. The IMF also includes the cost of the damage fossil fuel burning causes to climate and health, leading to an estimate of $5.2tn of fossil fuel subsidies in 2017, or $10m a minute. Ending the subsidies would cut global emissions by about a quarter, the IMF estimates, and halve the number of early deaths from fossil fuel air pollution.

 

[SageBrush]

The "usage" of fossil fuels by the "people" is NOT a "fossil fuel subsidy" IMHO.

Let's think about this for a moment...

Subsidy is tied to production
Production is tied to demand

I'll let you connect the dots

 

[d21mike]

Let's think about this for a moment...

Subsidy is tied to production
Production is tied to demand

I'll let you connect the dots

I will leave the dots to you. I stand my by my post.

 

[mspohr]

I found this from the Guardian. Do you agree with this? If so, is there any estimate that ONLY includes the first sentence? The rest of it that creates the total fossil fuel subsidy would not be agreed to by many (regular people) including me. The "usage" of fossil fuels by the "people" is NOT a "fossil fuel subsidy" IMHO.

Most experts define fossil fuel subsidies as financial or tax support for those buying fuel or the companies producing it. The IMF also includes the cost of the damage fossil fuel burning causes to climate and health, leading to an estimate of $5.2tn of fossil fuel subsidies in 2017, or $10m a minute. Ending the subsidies would cut global emissions by about a quarter, the IMF estimates, and halve the number of early deaths from fossil fuel air pollution.

I'm not clear on your point here. "I found this from the Guardian". What did you find?

Perhaps my post just a few up from this will help.
Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

 

[d21mike]

I'm not clear on your point here. "I found this from the Guardian". What did you find?

Perhaps my post just a few up from this will help.
Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

Some here were saying they like "The Guardian" for accurate reporting. And one post said he would "End fossil fuel subsidies". I wanted to get a definition of that and I found the following via Google.

Most experts define fossil fuel subsidies as financial or tax support for those buying fuel or the companies producing it. The IMF also includes the cost of the damage fossil fuel burning causes to climate and health, leading to an estimate of $5.2tn of fossil fuel subsidies in 2017, or $10m a minute. Ending the subsidies would cut global emissions by about a quarter, the IMF estimates, and halve the number of early deaths from fossil fuel air pollution.

Just 10% of fossil fuel subsidy cash 'could pay for green transition'

 

[cpa]

Our most recent PG&E bill came with an insert to reflect the sources of the electricity delivered by PG&E and delivered statewide. These figures are from calendar year 2018.

PG&E:

Solar......................................................18%
Wind......................................................11%
Other renewables..................................11%

Large hydro...........................................13%
Nuclear..................................................34%

Natural gas...........................................15%

California statewide:

Solar.....................................................11%
Wind.....................................................11%
Other renewables................................. 9%

Large hydro..........................................11%

Natural gas...........................................35%
Nuclear................................................. 9%

Coal (ugh)............................................. 3%

Unspecified (untraceable)....................11%

Columns may not foot to 100% due to rounding.
Other renewables include biomass and waste, geothermal, and small hydro.

I wonder how the grid will replace the nuclear once Diablo Canyon is fully decommissioned in about 6-7 years.

 

[d21mike]

Our most recent PG&E bill came with an insert to reflect the sources of the electricity delivered by PG&E and delivered statewide. These figures are from calendar year 2018.

PG&E:

Solar......................................................18%
Wind......................................................11%
Other renewables..................................11%

Large hydro...........................................13%
Nuclear..................................................34%

Natural gas...........................................15%

California statewide:

Solar.....................................................11%
Wind.....................................................11%
Other renewables................................. 9%

Large hydro..........................................11%

Natural gas...........................................35%
Nuclear................................................. 9%

Coal (ugh)............................................. 3%

Unspecified (untraceable)....................11%

Columns may not foot to 100% due to rounding.
Other renewables include biomass and waste, geothermal, and small hydro.

I wonder how the grid will replace the nuclear once Diablo Canyon is fully decommissioned in about 6-7 years.

This was a surprise to me. I thought electricity generation was heavily COAL? Maybe in other states. There has been a lot of talk about getting rid of COAL and the problem with people loosing their jobs. But this is saying at least in California COAL is already being phased out. Good?

 

[jerry33]

This was a surprise to me. I thought electricity generation was heavily COAL? Maybe in other states. There has been a lot of talk about getting rid of COAL and the problem with people loosing their jobs. But this is saying at least in California COAL is already being phased out. Good?

Nationwide it's 27.4% (2018) and falling. Only West Virginia is almost all coal (92%) and only Wyoming, North Dakota, Missouri, and Kentucky are over 70%. None of those states are major electricity producers (not in the top ten which produce slightly less than half of the nation's electricity).

And judging by the number of wind turbine blades I saw being transported last week on a trip to Nebraska, it's going to be reduced even more shortly.

 

[JRP3]

A lot of geothermal potential in the west

 

[iPlug]

This was a surprise to me. I thought electricity generation was heavily COAL? Maybe in other states. There has been a lot of talk about getting rid of COAL and the problem with people loosing their jobs. But this is saying at least in California COAL is already being phased out. Good?

Coal generated electricity is essentially all imported in CA and not much. Despite all the PG&E debacle stuff, they have one of the best generation portfolios in the US considering not having unlimited hydro. They are spinning up battery storage heavily as we speak so Diablo shutting down in a few years will not be a problem.

 

[ZsoZso]

So I see people disagreeing with No. 6637. That brings up another question: How does one disagree with a question?
And the question remains unanswered. How does one get rational people to accept an irrational proposition? While I suppose the original question was meant to be rhetorical I suppose the answer to it is "Hire a PR firm" which I guess what this poor child's handlers have done. And that leads to another rhetorical question: Have they no shame?

How can one lie with a question?
Have you stopped beating your wife yet ?

Other questions that come to mind reading your drivel:
How does a political movement eradicate any trace of rationality from a specimen of homo sapiens ?
Do you really not understand the difference between politics and science ?

 

[mspohr]

Giant Energy Companies Burn Away Vast Amounts of Natural Gas Despite Their Promises, Giant Energy Companies Burn Away Vast Amounts of Natural Gas

But in recent years, some of these same companies have significantly increased their flaring, as well as the venting of natural gas and other potent greenhouse gases directly into the atmosphere, according to data from the three largest shale-oil fields in the United States.

The data also shows that BP this year acquired some of the most polluting sites in the Permian and then allowed flaring and venting to increase. BP burned off 17 percent of the gas it produced in the Permian between April and June of this year (the first full quarter after the acquisition) making it the worst performer in percentage terms among the top 50 producers. In the year-earlier quarter, BP had burned only 10 percent.

 

[mspohr]

'There are no excuses left': why climate science deniers are running out of rope

'There are no excuses left': why climate science deniers are running out of rope

As the science of climate chaos has become vastly clearer in the past two decades, and the warnings more stark, the rearguard action fought by climate denialists has grown fiercer and their attacks more vicious. Fact-based arguments will never serve their purpose; trolling is the last refuge of the discredited. We can expect much more of the same.

Our climate knowledge has increased vastly in 15 years. No one can now plausibly say there is not enough data, or that we lack the technology, or that saving the climate is too expensive. All of these pretexts have been exploded by patient scientific work. There are no excuses left and now it is up to journalists to ensure there are no more hiding places either, in the boardrooms, on the websites of fake news, behind the facade of populism.