Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[mspohr]

Greenwash - Resilience

If someone is making money from oil, coal or gas but tries to persuade us that they are on our side on the climate crisis, and they’ve got a way to tackle it without stopping burning fossil fuels – that is greenwash. From fossil fuels industry get-togethers to oil company reports, the industry is ramping up its rhetoric about being part of the solution. ‘International Petroleum Week’ earlier this year portrayed itself as ‘Delivering a low-carbon future’, while the ‘Oil and Money’ conference in 2019 claimed to offer ‘Strategies for the energy transition’.

But most of all, we need to remember what the industry’s greenwash attempts to hide: its business causes a huge burden of human suffering, which falls most heavily on those who are already disadvantaged. Cleaner, cheaper alternatives are not only already available but rapidly dropping in price. With the world waking up to the urgent need for climate action, and fossil fuels unable to compete on safety, efficiency or cost, greenwashing is the only sales strategy left.

 

[JRP3]

https://twitter.com/WeatherProf/status/1330319503150952449?s=20

 

[iPlug]

2020 didn't quite beat 2012 for minimum arctic ice extent. But area under the curve for the whole year looks like will give 2020 a record there.

Charctic Interactive Sea Ice Graph | Arctic Sea Ice News and Analysis

 

[mspohr]

Why is Joe Biden considering this man to help fight the climate crisis?

Moniz was wading into a dispute that will define how the new Biden administration tackles the crisis: can oil and gas companies be part of the solution? Or have they proven, with years of disinformation campaigns and efforts to slow climate action, that they will always stand in the way?

As the Biden transition team wrestles with this question, it is already facing pressure from activists not to hire more people with fossil fuel ties, like Louisiana congressman Cedric Richmond, who will join Biden’s White House as a top adviser.

 

[mspohr]

European governments failing to protect citizens from air pollution, data reveals

Pollutants from farming, domestic heating and vehicles are beyond the levels needed to ensure breathable air within World Health Organization guidelines, despite EU legislation, government pledges and years of campaigning.

Only Ireland, Iceland, Finland and Estonia showed levels of fine particulate matter – one of the most dangerous forms of air pollution – that were below the WHO guidelines in 2018, according to data released on Monday by the European Environment Agency.

Exposure to such pollution caused about 417,000 premature deaths across Europe – including non-EU member states – in 2018.

 

[mspohr]

Could we ever pull enough carbon out of the atmosphere to stop climate change? | Live Science

Afforestation and reforestation — planting or replanting of forests, respectively — are well known natural carbon sinks. Vast numbers of trees can sequester the greenhouse gas carbon dioxide (CO2) from the atmosphere for photosynthesis, a chemical reaction that uses the sun's energy to turn carbon dioxide and water into sugar and oxygen. According to a 2019 study in the journal Science, planting 1 trillion trees could store about 225 billion tons (205 billion metric tons) of carbon, or about two-thirds of the carbon released by humans into the atmosphere since the Industrial Revolution began.

However, none of these technologies have been implemented on a large scale. They're extremely expensive, with estimates as high as $400 per ton of CO2 removed, and each still requires a lot of research and support before being deployed. But the U.S. is a good example of how a mix of carbon removal solutions could work together, Zelikova said: Land management could be used in the agricultural Midwest; basalt rocks in the Pacific Northwest are great for mineralization; and the oil fields in the Southwest are already primed with the right technology and skilled workers for underground carbon storage, she sai

Based on their climate model, the authors predict that even if we stop emitting greenhouse gases entirely, "global temperatures will be 3 C [5.4 F] warmer and sea levels 3 meters [10 feet] higher by 2500 than they were in 1850." To reverse climate change's effects, 33 gigatons of existing greenhouse gases must be removed this year and every year moving forward, the researchers said.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

I know many of you will not agree but i just cancelled my order and will wait till next spring/summer.

Current 326 mi range (less then 200 in real world-cold weather (according to my co-workers/friends) is just not enough.
Its ok for city - short distance car, but im not spending $60k for commuter car.
For city car - VW ID4 will cost $32k after all tax credits. Plus 3 years of free charging.

Next year we can expect this:
More range due new Panasonic battery and software could bring range up to 390 miles.
$7000 Tax credit for ALL EV vehicles sold next year looks promising.
Lower price of MY due new RWD model looks real too.
We should also expect interior re-design, it was rumoured china version is getting second/front screen soon.

And to add that word of the mouth is already starting to damage Tesla reputation (this comes from our local Tesla centre) i dont see this is the best time to spend $60k on new MY .

Agree?

FULLY AGREE!

If you are currently driving an ICE vehicle, you should NEVER buy a Tesla or any other EV, as long as you can continue to spew GHG's from your exhaust pipe for free.

Delay any EV or Tesla purchase as long as possible, preferably forever.

Why should you give a darn about anyone but yourself? It's unlikely that you personally will suffer from higher sea levels, more cyclones and hurricanes, and hotter, dryer droughts and wildfires, so why worry? "Burn baby burn" is the motto among many--why not you? If you have children, nieces, nephews, tell them to deal with it--it's sure as heck not your problem.

With the $123 million that ExxonMobil was making in DAILY PROFITS back in 2012/13, they were able to help ensure that any concerns about climate change were ignored; they turned it into a Left/Right "debate" instead, and it only cost them a few hours profit. Stunningly brilliant move!

It's pretty likely that Saudi Aramco was able to do the same on the global scene with their $304 million in DAILY PROFITS as well, except that it only cost them perhaps a few minutes of one day's profit. Another brilliant move as they, and other petro prostitutes were able to pull this off with such ease.

To paraphrase Churchill:

Never in human history have so many been so easily fooled, by so few, with so little.

So, yes, you should NOT BUY A TESLA OR ANY EV, EVER.

Buy ONLY GHG-spewing vehicles and use them often.

Thank you for your remarkably intelligent and well-informed post; let's have more of them soon!

******************************************************

1. Exxon Mobil profit just short of record.

Exxon Mobil just missed setting a company -- and world -- record for annual profit in 2012.
The No. 1 U.S. oil company posted full-year earnings of $44.9 billion. While that was up 9% from 2011, it was about $300 million below the all-time annual earnings record for any company, the $45.2 billion Exxon Mobil earned in 2008.

[truncated]

Since math and general intelligence may not be your skillset, please allow me to help:

$44,900,000,000 divided by 365 days is just over $123,000,000 dollars per day.

2. Saudi Aramco made $111 billion in 2018, topping Apple as the world's most profitable company

Saudi Aramco is by far the most profitable company in the world, according to financial data disclosed by the state-run oil giant in Saudi Arabia.

The company made a whopping $111 billion in 2018, the data shows. By comparison, Apple made $59.53 billion in fiscal 2018. Saudi Aramco also made more money than J.P. Morgan Chase, Google-parent Alphabet, Facebook and Exxon Mobil combined. Put together, those companies made nearly $106 billion in 2018, according to FactSet.

[truncated]

$111,000,000,000 divided by 365 days is just over $304,000,000 dollars per day.

3. How the game was played, using mostly Republican "leaders" as stooges to fool the grossly ill-informed and help make so many, massively, mind blowingly ignorant:

Climate of Doubt

Four years ago [note: 2008], climate change was a hot issue and politicians from both sides seemed poised to act. Today public opinion on the climate issue has cooled considerably. Politicians either ignore it or proclaim their skepticism. What’s behind this massive reversal? FRONTLINE goes inside the organizations that fought the scientific establishment to shift the direction of the climate debate.

4. A more recent update; the trailer alone speaks volumes:

Sony Pictures Classics presents 'Merchants of Doubt'

 

[coconutboy84]

FULLY AGREE!

If you are currently driving an ICE vehicle, you should NEVER buy a Tesla or any other EV, as long as you can continue to spew GHG's from your exhaust pipe for free.

Delay any EV or Tesla purchase as long as possible, preferably forever.

Why should you give a darn about anyone but yourself? It's unlikely that you personally will suffer from higher sea levels, more cyclones and hurricanes, and hotter, dryer droughts and wildfires, so why worry? "Burn baby burn" is the motto among many--why not you? If you have children, nieces, nephews, tell them to deal with it--it's sure as heck not your problem.

With the $123 million that ExxonMobil was making in DAILY PROFITS back in 2012/13, they were able to help ensure that any concerns about climate change were ignored; they turned it into a Left/Right "debate" instead, and it only cost them a few hours profit. Stunningly brilliant move!

It's pretty likely that Saudi Aramco was able to do the same on the global scene with their $304 million in DAILY PROFITS as well, except that it only cost them perhaps a few minutes of one day's profit. Another brilliant move as they, and other petro prostitutes were able to pull this off with such ease.

To paraphrase Churchill:

Never in human history have so many been so easily fooled, by so few, with so little.

So, yes, you should NOT BUY A TESLA OR ANY EV, EVER.

Buy ONLY GHG-spewing vehicles and use them often.

Thank you for your remarkably intelligent and well-informed post; let's have more of them soon!

******************************************************

1. Exxon Mobil profit just short of record.

Exxon Mobil just missed setting a company -- and world -- record for annual profit in 2012.
The No. 1 U.S. oil company posted full-year earnings of $44.9 billion. While that was up 9% from 2011, it was about $300 million below the all-time annual earnings record for any company, the $45.2 billion Exxon Mobil earned in 2008.

[truncated]

Since math and general intelligence may not be your skillset, please allow me to help:

$44,900,000,000 divided by 365 days is just over $123,000,000 dollars per day.

2. Saudi Aramco made $111 billion in 2018, topping Apple as the world's most profitable company

Saudi Aramco is by far the most profitable company in the world, according to financial data disclosed by the state-run oil giant in Saudi Arabia.

The company made a whopping $111 billion in 2018, the data shows. By comparison, Apple made $59.53 billion in fiscal 2018. Saudi Aramco also made more money than J.P. Morgan Chase, Google-parent Alphabet, Facebook and Exxon Mobil combined. Put together, those companies made nearly $106 billion in 2018, according to FactSet.

[truncated]

$111,000,000,000 divided by 365 days is just over $304,000,000 dollars per day.

3. How the game was played, using mostly Republican "leaders" as stooges to fool the grossly ill-informed and help make so many, massively, mind blowingly ignorant:

Climate of Doubt

Four years ago [note: 2008], climate change was a hot issue and politicians from both sides seemed poised to act. Today public opinion on the climate issue has cooled considerably. Politicians either ignore it or proclaim their skepticism. What’s behind this massive reversal? FRONTLINE goes inside the organizations that fought the scientific establishment to shift the direction of the climate debate.

4. A more recent update; the trailer alone speaks volumes:

Sony Pictures Classics presents 'Merchants of Doubt'

can you back it down with this stuff?

 

[TSLA Pilot]

can you back it down with this stuff?

Yes, I am so sorry to bring this up, how it is that we have placed our entire planet's future in great peril.

You are correct--we should not discuss, in any way, the greatest threat we face as a species.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Sort of sad that so many people think when they don't agree with someone else, then they must be either far left or far right.

It's part of the stunningly effective move by fossil fuel interests--make it about everything OTHER than the science. They can't argue the science, so they brilliantly turned it into some sort of a George Soros, Hillary Clinton, Al Gore "Takin' away your 'Merican freedoms!" story. It's complete and utter BS, but here we are . . .

What is beyond pathetic is just how many ignorants in the US (and elsewhere?) are so easily fooled.

Since some can't/won't admit to their stupidity, it's really incumbent upon all of the non-idiots among us to ACT. "ACT" means:

1. EV's in the garage.
2. Solar panels all over the roof.
3. Gas meter: Removed.

We've done all of the above as it's incumbent to abide by this quote if we're to leave a usable planet for others:

Every time you spend money, you're casting a vote for the kind of world you want.
― Anna Lappe

At our planet's great peril, far, far too many among us live in The Land of Make Believe where insanity and wishful thinking rule the day.

p.s. Anyone else notice that not one of their posts refutes a single factual link I've provided? Instead, it's all about attacking the person, aka, "Shoot the messenger."

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Regarding the OP, if it does not fit your needs then don't buy it. Why the need poop on the doorstep on the way out? Wording is a bit bitter...perhaps angry at himself/herself for making a wrong decision and needing to change course.

For many of us, the capabilities work and have lots of benefits. To each his own.

Sorry, but have to disagree.

The OP, unfortunately, isn't living on his own planet.

His decision to keep buying fossil fuels literally allows him (for now and ever since the ICE was invented), to dump his GHG's all over the place, FOR FREE. It's everyone else that'll pay for it--they're called "Externalities."

So, no, "To each his own" does not apply here.

Until we get seriously aggressive carbon taxes, shame will have to suffice: where behavior is shameful, it's incumbent upon us to call it out.

 

[spokey]

Yes, I am so sorry to bring this up, how it is that we have placed our entire planet's future in great peril.

You are correct--we should not discuss, in any way, the greatest threat we face as a species.

Thank you for your valuable contribution to this thread.

Apples and oranges. the greatest threat we face as a species. Could be. Debatable, but could be.

But we have placed our entire planet's future in great peril. Really? That's pretty narcissistic. Will the earth keel over and curl up? Fall in to a deadly depression culminating in suicide? Nah. Even if the above speculation is true, the good ol' earth will do just fine without us. The earth has a future with or without us.

 

[rays427]

FULLY AGREE!

If you are currently driving an ICE vehicle, you should NEVER buy a Tesla or any other EV, as long as you can continue to spew GHG's from your exhaust pipe for free.

Delay any EV or Tesla purchase as long as possible, preferably forever.

Why should you give a darn about anyone but yourself? It's unlikely that you personally will suffer from higher sea levels, more cyclones and hurricanes, and hotter, dryer droughts and wildfires, so why worry? "Burn baby burn" is the motto among many--why not you? If you have children, nieces, nephews, tell them to deal with it--it's sure as heck not your problem.

With the $123 million that ExxonMobil was making in DAILY PROFITS back in 2012/13, they were able to help ensure that any concerns about climate change were ignored; they turned it into a Left/Right "debate" instead, and it only cost them a few hours profit. Stunningly brilliant move!

It's pretty likely that Saudi Aramco was able to do the same on the global scene with their $304 million in DAILY PROFITS as well, except that it only cost them perhaps a few minutes of one day's profit. Another brilliant move as they, and other petro prostitutes were able to pull this off with such ease.

To paraphrase Churchill:

Never in human history have so many been so easily fooled, by so few, with so little.

So, yes, you should NOT BUY A TESLA OR ANY EV, EVER.

Buy ONLY GHG-spewing vehicles and use them often.

Thank you for your remarkably intelligent and well-informed post; let's have more of them soon!

******************************************************

1. Exxon Mobil profit just short of record.

Exxon Mobil just missed setting a company -- and world -- record for annual profit in 2012.
The No. 1 U.S. oil company posted full-year earnings of $44.9 billion. While that was up 9% from 2011, it was about $300 million below the all-time annual earnings record for any company, the $45.2 billion Exxon Mobil earned in 2008.

[truncated]

Since math and general intelligence may not be your skillset, please allow me to help:

$44,900,000,000 divided by 365 days is just over $123,000,000 dollars per day.

2. Saudi Aramco made $111 billion in 2018, topping Apple as the world's most profitable company

Saudi Aramco is by far the most profitable company in the world, according to financial data disclosed by the state-run oil giant in Saudi Arabia.

The company made a whopping $111 billion in 2018, the data shows. By comparison, Apple made $59.53 billion in fiscal 2018. Saudi Aramco also made more money than J.P. Morgan Chase, Google-parent Alphabet, Facebook and Exxon Mobil combined. Put together, those companies made nearly $106 billion in 2018, according to FactSet.

[truncated]

$111,000,000,000 divided by 365 days is just over $304,000,000 dollars per day.

3. How the game was played, using mostly Republican "leaders" as stooges to fool the grossly ill-informed and help make so many, massively, mind blowingly ignorant:

Climate of Doubt

Four years ago [note: 2008], climate change was a hot issue and politicians from both sides seemed poised to act. Today public opinion on the climate issue has cooled considerably. Politicians either ignore it or proclaim their skepticism. What’s behind this massive reversal? FRONTLINE goes inside the organizations that fought the scientific establishment to shift the direction of the climate debate.

4. A more recent update; the trailer alone speaks volumes:

Sony Pictures Classics presents 'Merchants of Doubt'

For Exxon profit you picked a year of maximum profit. If you look at their profit over the years you will see it varies considerably. For the last several years it has been minimal and currently it's negative. This is the case for all oil companies (boom and bust). If you look at profit margins you will see they are generally low compared to other industries especially compared to companies like Apple, Google, etc.

 

[TSLA Pilot]

For Exxon profit you picked a year of maximum profit. If you look at their profit over the years you will see it varies considerably. For the last several years it has been minimal and currently it's negative. This is the case for all oil companies (boom and bust). If you look at profit margins you will see they are generally low compared to other industries especially compared to companies like Apple, Google, etc.

Rays--

Reading comprehension is really, really important. Give it a try as your comment is absurd.

From the CNN article previously quoted:

Exxon Mobil profit just short of record

Exxon Mobil just missed setting a company -- and world -- record for annual profit in 2012.
The No. 1 U.S. oil company posted full-year earnings of $44.9 billion. While that was up 9% from 2011, it was about $300 million below the all-time annual earnings record for any company, the $45.2 billion Exxon Mobil earned in 2008.

[truncated]

Thus, it wasn't a record profit.

But, critically, you have missed the point entirely. It has taken only A FEW HOURS of ONE DAY'S PROFIT to fund a misinformation campaign the likes of which this planet has never seen before:

Climate Disinformation

The energy business is one of the largest industries in the world. Major fossil fuel companies routinely make billion-dollar profits, extracting and distributing oil, gas, and coal.

Unfortunately, fossil fuels produce carbon dioxide (CO2) when burnt—and CO2 is the main driver of climate change.

Instead of acknowledging the harmful effects of their products and committing to swift and deep reductions in global warming emissions, many of the world's largest fossil fuel companies have knowingly deceived the public about the climate science and policy—and they continue to do so today.

Deception
REPORT

The Climate Deception Dossiers
Leaked documents show that the world's largest fossil fuel companies have deliberately deceived the public for nearly 30 years about the realities and risks of climate change.
More than 50 years ago, scientists at major fossil fuel companies considered how climate change should factor into decisions about new fossil fuel extraction. Their concerns echoed the latest science of the time, which showed an increasing link between fossil fuels and global warming.

Corporate decision makers didn’t listen. Instead, they chose to downplay and distort the evidence of climate change, engaging in a decades-long campaign against climate action. Their tactics included everything from counterfeit science, to the harassment of scientists, to manufactured uncertainty with no scientific basis.

Even today, industry trade groups and associations spread disinformation on climate change, while corporate lobbyists influence politicians and regulators—all with the financial backing and support of major fossil fuel companies.

[truncated]

***************************

The reality is that decades into the greatest science experiment ever conducted we have an endless march of the morons "attacking" the science based on pure, intentional, misinformation, because science is a topic they either forgot, or never had, in grade school and high school. And it's even occurring here on the TMC Forums.

This is critical: Get smart, NOW, and ACT please.

The planet is seemingly filled with far, far too many that are simply clueless, ignorant, and remarkably gullible, to the detriment of all life on Earth.

If you don't act, just who do you think will?!?

 

[TSLA Pilot]

Apples and oranges. the greatest threat we face as a species. Could be. Debatable, but could be.

But we have placed our entire planet's future in great peril. Really? That's pretty narcissistic. Will the earth keel over and curl up? Fall in to a deadly depression culminating in suicide? Nah. Even if the above speculation is true, the good ol' earth will do just fine without us. The earth has a future with or without us.

Wow, spokey, that's some pretty incredible writing.

Would you please post the links to legitimate, sciential, websites supporting your contention that we can, actually, dump unlimited amounts of GHG's with nary a worry?

I'll agree, however, with this well-beyond-idiotic statement:

The earth has a future with or without us.

As a courtesy to future generations, I give a damn about the planet we leave behind. I am sure they would be far happier if you would too.

Perhaps if you knew what a positive feedback loop was you wouldn't write such jaw-dropping things? Perhaps that might have you replace all of your ICE cars with more EV's ASAP?

15 Climate Feedback Loops and Examples - Earth How

In closing, let us all hope that the late Carl Sagan's quote will help you understand that nature of this crisis, because you haven't a clue based on your writing above:

We live in a society absolutely dependent on science and technology and yet have cleverly arranged things so that almost no one understands science and technology. That's a clear prescription for disaster.

 

[mspohr]

Follow the money

https://view.emails.sierraclub.org/...e00e41a5f90e433ea3fb61694e6e39e7696ff7fe64c0b

 

[Merrill]

Yes, unfortunately much of what happens in this country has to do with money. Guess who has a lot of that money. Not sure how we can change that other than a revolution like we did in the 60’s. The one thing that a person has total control over is their integrity. It is discussing that these people not only do not care about integrity they obviously do not care about the future world that their kids and grandkids will be living in.

 

[Merrill]

Yes, unfortunately much of what happens in this country has to do with money. Guess who has a lot of that money. Not sure how we can change that other than a revolution like we did in the 60’s. The one thing that a person has total control over is their integrity. It is discussing that these people not only do not care about integrity they obviously do not care about the future world that their kids and grandkids will be living in.

Sorry, should be disgusting.

 

[mspohr]

International lawyers draft plan to criminalise ecosystem destruction
International lawyers are drafting plans for a legally enforceable crime of ecocide – criminalising destruction of the world’s ecosystems – that is already attracting support from European countries and island nations at risk from rising sea levels

 

[mspohr]

Shell in court over claims it hampered fossil fuels phase-out

It is claimed the Anglo-Dutch company is breaching article 6:162 of the Dutch civil code and violating articles 2 and 8 of the European convention on human rights – the right to life and the right to family life – by causing a danger to others when alternative measures could be be taken.