-
Want to remove ads? Register an account and login to see fewer ads, and become a Supporting Member to remove almost all ads.
Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion
- Thread starter Raffy.Roma
- Start date
-
- Tags
- Energy Environment Policy
mspohr
Well-Known Member
We can’t keep eating as we are – why isn’t the IPCC shouting this from the rooftops?
We can’t keep eating as we are – why isn’t the IPCC shouting this from the rooftops? | George Monbiot
The official carbon footprint of people in the UK is 5.4 tonnes of carbon dioxide per person per year. But in addition to this, the Nature paper estimates that the total greenhouse gas cost – in terms of lost opportunities for storing carbon that the land would offer were it not being farmed – of an average northern European diet is 9 tonnes a year. In other words, if we counted the “carbon opportunity costs” of our diet, our total footprint would almost triple, to 14.4 tonnes.
The problem is that it concentrates on just one of the two ways of counting the carbon costs of farming. The first way – the IPCC’s approach – could be described as farming’s current account. How much greenhouse gas does driving tractors, spreading fertiliser and raising livestock produce every year? According to the panel’s report, the answer is around 23% of the planet-heating gases we currently produce. But this fails miserably to capture the overall impact of food production.
Then there are the nature opportunity costs. A famous paper in Science shows that a plant-based diet would release 76% of the land currently used for farming. This land could then be used for the mass restoration of ecosystems and wildlife, pulling the living world back from the brink of ecological collapse and a sixth great extinction.
One kilo of beef protein has a carbon opportunity cost of 1,250kg: that, incredibly, is roughly equal to driving a new car for a year, or to one passenger flying from London to New York and back.
We can’t keep eating as we are – why isn’t the IPCC shouting this from the rooftops? | George Monbiot
The official carbon footprint of people in the UK is 5.4 tonnes of carbon dioxide per person per year. But in addition to this, the Nature paper estimates that the total greenhouse gas cost – in terms of lost opportunities for storing carbon that the land would offer were it not being farmed – of an average northern European diet is 9 tonnes a year. In other words, if we counted the “carbon opportunity costs” of our diet, our total footprint would almost triple, to 14.4 tonnes.
The problem is that it concentrates on just one of the two ways of counting the carbon costs of farming. The first way – the IPCC’s approach – could be described as farming’s current account. How much greenhouse gas does driving tractors, spreading fertiliser and raising livestock produce every year? According to the panel’s report, the answer is around 23% of the planet-heating gases we currently produce. But this fails miserably to capture the overall impact of food production.
Then there are the nature opportunity costs. A famous paper in Science shows that a plant-based diet would release 76% of the land currently used for farming. This land could then be used for the mass restoration of ecosystems and wildlife, pulling the living world back from the brink of ecological collapse and a sixth great extinction.
One kilo of beef protein has a carbon opportunity cost of 1,250kg: that, incredibly, is roughly equal to driving a new car for a year, or to one passenger flying from London to New York and back.
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
I guess large bright fonts = truth so...
June 2019 was hottest on record for the globe
July 2019 was the hottest month ever recorded on Earth
June 2019 was hottest on record for the globe
July 2019 was the hottest month ever recorded on Earth
I watched a dealer spin a roulette wheel in Vegas back in 1990 and the ball landed on the number 12. There was a 2.7% chance of it hitting that number as there are 37 outcomes on the wheel. Last week I was at an interesting Native American Casino and they had a roulette wheel that replaced the 00 and every number above 3 with a 12. The dealer spun the wheel, and it hit a 12! The same number as 1990. The chances of hitting that number on the wheel were 92%, a full 34x higher than in 1990. But the outcome was the same.
What an amazing turn of events, right? I guess there was no difference between the two events.
Apparently you missed the link I posted above that shows that almost 2/3 of NOAA’s global data is fake. It is easy to make it the hottest month when you use fake data. If you actually read the thermometers then you would know that this has been the coldest year on record so far in the US (since 1895). But why read thermometers when you can make up fake warming data to advance your socialist agenda? I mean after all, reading thermometers is so yesterday when you can just make up whatever data you want and scare people instead!
Last edited:
Apparently you missed the posts made discrediting that site you posted from.
New York Attorney General Sues ExxonMobil Over Alleged Climate Change Fraud
LOL, silly alarmists hoaxsters, ehh
LOL, silly alarmists hoaxsters, ehh
You can't refute any of the data because you know it it true. So you lamely attempt to attack the source instead. I DARE you to refute any of it with empirical data. It'll be fun watching you try to refute this and make an even bigger fool out of yourself in the process. I can't wait!
Last edited:
JRP3
Hyperactive Member
If you could actually read you would know my links were about world temperatures not just the U.S. You do know the world is larger than the U.S.? Maybe I didn't make my fonts big enough for you.
JRP3 already did it.You can't refute any of the data because you know it it true. So you lamely attempt to attack the source instead. I DARE you to refute any of it with empirical data. It'll be fun watching you try to refute this and make an even bigger fool out of yourself in the process. I can't wait!
This is like when every winter you climate change deniers claim that climate change is debunked because it's cold in the US when at the same time Australia is breaking heat records.
Last edited:
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Why Solar Activity And Cosmic Rays Can’t Explain Global Warming
As a climate scientist, I hear my share of myths about what is causing climate change or why it is a “hoax.” I call them “zombie theories” because they just will not die. They persist in blogs, certain networks, and social media like zombies long after scientists have killed them off. I debunked 20 of them in a previous article in Forbes. The “sun and its variability” is one that makes the rounds. I am pretty sure I’ve had to spray “climate science repellent” on that nagging “mosquito” numerous times. This week I heard of a variation of this myth involving cosmic rays. Here is a science-based debunking of the solar-cosmic ray myth.
One of the “smoking guns” that tells us the Sun is not causing global warming comes from looking at the amount of the Sun’s energy that hits the top of the atmosphere. Since 1978, scientists have been tracking this using sensors on satellites and what they tell us is that there has been no upward trend in the amount of the Sun’s energy reaching Earth.
NASA Global Climate Change website
As a climate scientist, I hear my share of myths about what is causing climate change or why it is a “hoax.” I call them “zombie theories” because they just will not die. They persist in blogs, certain networks, and social media like zombies long after scientists have killed them off. I debunked 20 of them in a previous article in Forbes. The “sun and its variability” is one that makes the rounds. I am pretty sure I’ve had to spray “climate science repellent” on that nagging “mosquito” numerous times. This week I heard of a variation of this myth involving cosmic rays. Here is a science-based debunking of the solar-cosmic ray myth.
One of the “smoking guns” that tells us the Sun is not causing global warming comes from looking at the amount of the Sun’s energy that hits the top of the atmosphere. Since 1978, scientists have been tracking this using sensors on satellites and what they tell us is that there has been no upward trend in the amount of the Sun’s energy reaching Earth.
NASA Global Climate Change website
Frank Luntz, the GOP’s message master, calls for climate action
Luntz played a role in turning the environment into a partisan battlefield. During President George W. Bush’s first term, his infamous memo warned Republican party leaders that they were losing “the environmental communications battle,” an issue on which Bush was “most vulnerable.” He advised them to emphasize a lack of scientific certainty around climate change and drop “global warming” for the less scary-sounding “climate change.”
Luntz is now offering his messaging services to the cause of climate action. “I’m here before you to say that I was wrong in 2001,” Luntz told the Senate committee. “Just stop using something that I wrote 18 years ago, because it’s not accurate today.”
Luntz played a role in turning the environment into a partisan battlefield. During President George W. Bush’s first term, his infamous memo warned Republican party leaders that they were losing “the environmental communications battle,” an issue on which Bush was “most vulnerable.” He advised them to emphasize a lack of scientific certainty around climate change and drop “global warming” for the less scary-sounding “climate change.”
Luntz is now offering his messaging services to the cause of climate action. “I’m here before you to say that I was wrong in 2001,” Luntz told the Senate committee. “Just stop using something that I wrote 18 years ago, because it’s not accurate today.”
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Double hit: destroy a forest to mine coal
Greta Thunberg takes climate fight to Germany’s threatened Hambach Forest
Greta Thunberg takes climate fight to Germany’s threatened Hambach Forest
Greta Thunberg started her long journey to climate summits in the Americas by joining a treetop protest in Germany’s Hambach forest, where environmentalists have been fighting for years to stop the ancient woodland being torn up for open-cast coal mining.
The battle to save the last remaining oak and hornbeam trees reflects the young activist’s entwined fights to protect the natural world from human exploitation and to halt carbon emissions.
Greta Thunberg takes climate fight to Germany’s threatened Hambach Forest
Greta Thunberg takes climate fight to Germany’s threatened Hambach Forest
Greta Thunberg started her long journey to climate summits in the Americas by joining a treetop protest in Germany’s Hambach forest, where environmentalists have been fighting for years to stop the ancient woodland being torn up for open-cast coal mining.
The battle to save the last remaining oak and hornbeam trees reflects the young activist’s entwined fights to protect the natural world from human exploitation and to halt carbon emissions.
cpa
Active Member
The first rule of TMC is never to challenge a statement by Ohmman. I am throwing caution to the wind, and I am going to dispute this statement.
American roulette (as opposed to European roulette) has the numbers 1-36 inclusive on the wheel, plus aught and double-aught, for a total of 38. This slightly reduces the odds to .0263.
I believe that in 1990 all American casinos were using the 38-digit wheel. Perhaps a few nowadays are trying the European wheel that omits the double-aught.
One also needs to look at the fine print for the payouts. If one were to bet $1 on the winning number, the payout is 35 for 1, not 35 to 1. So, winners receive only $35 instead of getting their bet returned to them, or $36 under the 35 to 1 methodology. Just another way to tilt the odds in a substantial way towards the house.
That is why I stick with playing the ponies.
Indeed, in my rush to analogize climate statistics to casino statistics, I missed the single 0. Assuming that case, and assuming that the Native casino also had left the 0 alone, the odds do change to 0.0263 and 0.8943, for a multiplier of 34.02x more likely. So not much difference to the final result, but important clarifications nonetheless.
As far as gambling goes, I purposefully did not say that I placed a bet at the wheel. I learned a long time ago to avoid casinos. I've found the equity markets to be a much more predictable gamble.
This is a somewhat interesting white paper on the climate resilience measures taken by eight major cities. Most of it has to do with water resiliency (sea level rise, etc.) but I think it's informative as to some of the societal costs of AGW.
http://lifeaftercarbon.net/wp-conte...e-Paying-for-Climate-Resilience-July-2019.pdf
http://lifeaftercarbon.net/wp-conte...e-Paying-for-Climate-Resilience-July-2019.pdf
mspohr
Well-Known Member
Raise car fuel prices to fight air pollution, says rightwing thinktank
Raise car fuel prices to fight air pollution, says rightwing thinktank
Vehicle fuel taxes should rise to combat the air pollution crisis in the UK, with an extra charge on diesel, according to the conservative thinktank Bright Blue.
A report calls for VAT to be abolished on electric cars and for citizens to be able to report idling vehicles and receive a share of fines levied. It also proposes that the speed limit in all urban areas is cut from 30mph to 20mph and that local authorities should be able to profit from pollution charging schemes to fund clean-air projects.
Raise car fuel prices to fight air pollution, says rightwing thinktank
Vehicle fuel taxes should rise to combat the air pollution crisis in the UK, with an extra charge on diesel, according to the conservative thinktank Bright Blue.
A report calls for VAT to be abolished on electric cars and for citizens to be able to report idling vehicles and receive a share of fines levied. It also proposes that the speed limit in all urban areas is cut from 30mph to 20mph and that local authorities should be able to profit from pollution charging schemes to fund clean-air projects.
Similar threads
