“There is No Climate Emergency”

[Sugar Baby Wanted]

The US has spent more than all on this nonsense in a quest for power. If there was no financial incentive there would be no climate change agenda.

The US has cleaned up their air significantly while China and India are allowed to double down? WTF - why not go after them?

When you can stop China and others from contributing the most, then you might have a cause. Otherwise you are using a strawman argument that the US is the problem.

 

[Sugar Baby Wanted]

Hmm mind supply a link for this "source"?

Here is a 1975 to 2021 link to CO2 emissions....seems they went up by 6.5 % in 2021....and emissions have not fallen below 4500 billion tons since 1983.......https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-1999/ so you think 4500 billion tons is "reduced CO2 emissions to next to nothing" eh?

Here is something you can play with, when you're bored....whole lot of yellow btw....if this is your idea of "fantastic air"...well???????
https://aqicn.org/map/usa/

I've been off grid since 2006, imagine that,no electrical bills in 16 years, no black outs...no days without power....yes green energy is a con.....*chuckles*

Duckduckgo is your friend.

 

[Rotadom]

The US has spent more than all on this nonsense in a quest for power. If there was no financial incentive there would be no climate change agenda.

The US has cleaned up their air significantly while China and India are allowed to double down? WTF - why not go after them?

When you can stop China and others from contributing the most, then you might have a cause. Otherwise you are using a strawman argument that the US is the problem.

LOL! Every point that you just failed to make has already been dismissed in this very thread.

 

[ll74]

The US has spent more than all on this nonsense in a quest for power. If there was no financial incentive there would be no climate change agenda.

The US has cleaned up their air significantly while China and India are allowed to double down? WTF - why not go after them?

When you can stop China and others from contributing the most, then you might have a cause. Otherwise you are using a strawman argument that the US is the problem.

The world is going after them, which is why China has a goal of 2030 and 2060 for carbon reduction. India is a bit trickier.

The US emits a huge amount of CO2 and always has been in the top 5 of those emissions. It's not about blame to most people except you.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Duckduckgo is your friend.

But not your's apparently since you can't back up your assertions....

 

[oggbashan]

There it is!! You just proved my point!

Yes, I have. You ARE fake news.

 

[Sugar Baby Wanted]

But not your's apparently since you can't back up your assertions....

I'm not arguing with an idiot. Do your own research.

 

[Sugar Baby Wanted]

Is air quality in the US improving?


Between 1990 and 2020, national concentrations of air pollutants improved 73 percent for carbon monoxide, 86 percent for lead (from 2010), 61 percent for annual nitrogen dioxide, 25 percent for ozone, 26 percent for 24-hour coarse particle concentrations, 41 percent for annual fine particles (from 2000), and 91 percent . Please google the rest yourself.

 

[ll74]

Is air quality in the US improving?


Between 1990 and 2020, national concentrations of air pollutants improved 73 percent for carbon monoxide, 86 percent for lead (from 2010), 61 percent for annual nitrogen dioxide, 25 percent for ozone, 26 percent for 24-hour coarse particle concentrations, 41 percent for annual fine particles (from 2000), and 91 percent . Please google the rest yourself.

As far as anyone knows, you just made this all up.
Google the rest yourself.

 

[icanhelp1]

Hmm mind supply a link for this "source"?

Here is a 1975 to 2021 link to CO2 emissions....seems they went up by 6.5 % in 2021....and emissions have not fallen below 4500 billion tons since 1983.......https://www.statista.com/statistics/183943/us-carbon-dioxide-emissions-from-1999/ so you think 4500 billion tons is "reduced CO2 emissions to next to nothing" eh?

Here is something you can play with, when you're bored....whole lot of yellow btw....if this is your idea of "fantastic air"...well???????
https://aqicn.org/map/usa/

I've been off grid since 2006, imagine that,no electrical bills in 16 years, no black outs...no days wi

Yes, I have. You ARE fake news.

How the fuck Am I fake news? I never refuted the facts on global warming. What I challenge is how we approach the problem. When posters scream we have to buy solar panels and windmills to neutralise CO2 emissions I just have to laugh. When I say plant billions of trees I'm as serious as a heart attack, deforestation is one of the reasons for increased levels of CO2 which is a manmade problem. It's not the only approach but it one no one discusses. A greener earth will slow temp elevation by absorbing sunlight and CO2 at the same time. Burning cleaner fuels would also slow the production of greenhouse gases. If countries converted to burning LNG rather than coal, wood or petroleum distillates that would go a long way to reducing CO2 emissions. I've always been of the mindset that solving this problem will require a comprehensive approach to the problem that doesn't include the complete destruction of major economies.

Manufacturing solar panel, wind turbines, EVs requires preparation, first a coordinated supply chain that doesn't increase greenhouse gases as part of the manufacturing process as well as a manufacturing process that also doesn't increases greenhouse gasses as a byproduct. If we're to minimise our carbon footprint then we have to use renewable carbon free energy sources but no one seems to be interested in nuclear as demonstrated by Germany shutting down their nuclear power plants. Nuclear, solar geothermal, wind, biofuels to a certain extent, LNG, energy storage capacity combined with CO2 absorption, making the planet greener, carbon capture technology, controlled burning of forest and socially responsible manufacturing will be key going forward. Buying shit from China because they can make the shit and because they don't care about greenhouse gas emissions is just plain stupid. China agreed to peek emissions by 2030. China's been lying to us for 50 years, I don't believe a fucking word out of China or India for that matter.

 

[ll74]

Manufacturing solar panel, wind turbines, EVs requires preparation, first a coordinated supply chain that doesn't increase greenhouse gases as part of the manufacturing process as well as a manufacturing process that also doesn't increases greenhouse gasses as a byproduct. If we're to minimise our carbon footprint then we have to use renewable carbon free energy sources but no one seems to be interested in nuclear as demonstrated by Germany shutting down their nuclear power plants. Nuclear, solar geothermal, wind, biofuels to a certain extent, LNG, energy storage capacity combined with CO2 absorption, making the planet greener, carbon capture technology, controlled burning of forest and socially responsible manufacturing will be key going forward. Buying shit from China because they can make the shit and because they don't care about greenhouse gas emissions is just plain stupid. China agreed to peek emissions by 2030. China's been lying to us for 50 years, I don't believe a fucking word out of China or India for that matter.

So manufacturing requires an actual process? Say it ain't so!

You know how to buy solar panels from the US? Manufacture them in the US.

You know what the recent law and chips laws signed do? Subsidizes manufacturing plants to bring them online to produce green tech.

 

[oggbashan]

Germany is seriously considering NOT shutting their nuclear power plants:

https://uk.news.yahoo.com/germany-may-resort-nuclear-plants-143235754.html

 

[John_von_Neumann]

Is air quality in the US improving?


Between 1990 and 2020, national concentrations of air pollutants improved 73 percent for carbon monoxide, 86 percent for lead (from 2010), 61 percent for annual nitrogen dioxide, 25 percent for ozone, 26 percent for 24-hour coarse particle concentrations, 41 percent for annual fine particles (from 2000), and 91 percent . Please google the rest yourself.

So, we can be good stewards of the environment without doing irreparable harm to the economy? Shh! Don't tell Ishmael!

 

[Rightguide]

Narrow definition?

What planet are you on?

The OP and the 1,200 are challenging a consensus of almost all relevantly qualified scientists in the world and you think being UNQUALIFIED gives them authority to reverse that view?

You might as well ask Kim Kardashian to design a nuclear reactor. She is unqualified - so she'll do.

Then we have the leaders of Europe being driven into the hell of a failing green energy policy before the lash of a ranting 15-year-old child and her fairy tales about Utopia, only to be reintroduced to reality by Vladimir Putin.

 

[Rightguide]

Manufacturing solar panel, wind turbines, EVs requires preparation, first a coordinated supply chain that doesn't increase greenhouse gases as part of the manufacturing process as well as a manufacturing process that also doesn't increases greenhouse gasses as a byproduct. If we're to minimise our carbon footprint then we have to use renewable carbon free energy sources but no one seems to be interested in nuclear as demonstrated by Germany shutting down their nuclear power plants. Nuclear, solar geothermal, wind, biofuels to a certain extent, LNG, energy storage capacity combined with CO2 absorption, making the planet greener, carbon capture technology, controlled burning of forest and socially responsible manufacturing will be key going forward. Buying shit from China because they can make the shit and because they don't care about greenhouse gas emissions is just plain stupid. China agreed to peek emissions by 2030. China's been lying to us for 50 years, I don't believe a fucking word out of China or India for that matter.

Already there are environmental "scientists" worried about the disposal of the toxic material contained in those panels and how to dispose of them when they wear out.

 

[Rightguide]

!. Not all of the 1,200 are scientists.

2. If they were scientists, they should have read and understood the arguments for a climate emergency put forward by a massive majority of the scientists qualified in that field.

3. If after studying all the data, they still felt that there was something amiss, they should have provided their own research and data to challenge the consensus view. They didn't and don't. They just say, with Rightguide 'We disagree' with NO EVIDENCE WHATEVER. That makes them, not scientists, but gullible idiots.

Edited for PS:

If any of the 1,200 hold academic degrees, those degrees should be stripped from them, and they should be fired from any academic posts they hold - for gross incompetence.

An opposing point of view is what totalitarian thugs strive to stamp out. The free exchange of ideas is not to be tolerated by the latent communist screaming to get out of Ogg's chest.

PS: I gave you a link to alternative points of view on climate change but in fear you dutifully ignored it.

 

[oggbashan]

Yes. You gave links to fake news websites and conspiracy theorists.

Gee, thanks!

You have absolutely NO understanding of how the world's scientists are in agreement over the need for action. That extent of agreement is almost unprecedented on any subject.

You just prefer to believe assholes and idiots.

 

[ll74]

An opposing point of view is what totalitarian thugs strive to stamp out. The free exchange of ideas is not to be tolerated by the latent communist screaming to get out of Ogg's chest.

PS: I gave you a link to alternative points of view on climate change but in fear you dutifully ignored it.

Alternative points of view from laymen is quaint but useless for decisions regarding actual climate science and are even counterproductive in regards to taking action

 

[icanhelp1]

Already there are environmental "scientists" worried about the disposal of the toxic material contained in those panels and how to dispose of them when they wear out.

I mentioned waste streams cradle to grave concerns

 

[ll74]

Already there are environmental "scientists" worried about the disposal of the toxic material contained in those panels and how to dispose of them when they wear out.

There are actual environmental scientists who are also concerned. That's why.processes need to be scrutinized by engineers rather than politicians or armchair activists.

 

[Rightguide]

Yes. You gave links to fake news websites and conspiracy theorists.

Gee, thanks!

You have absolutely NO understanding of how the world's scientists are in agreement over the need for action. That extent of agreement is almost unprecedented on any subject.

You just prefer to believe assholes and idiots.

Shut up with the demented bullshit. I know as much about this as you do and more.

The proposed "actions" are destroying civilization. What's happening in Sri Lanka is a harbinger of what is going to happen everywhere else people like you buy into this utter bullshit that our civilization can survive without fossil fuels and the imposition of the Green New Deal.

 

[LukSkyFokker]

I know as much about this as you do and more.

You're totally uneducated on the topic and that's why you post easily refuted links as proof.

 

[lovecraft68]

Maybe its been mentioned, I'm not great at reading through this many posts.
Stories out there China may revert back to coal.
Things like that make me seriously wonder what the point is when it comes to the US. Do these climate obsessed politicians really think we can slow/prevent anything, or is it just a matter of getting the dollars of all the green lobbyists in their pockets?
Because there's not a person in congress on either side of the fence who does anything because their altruistic

 

[Rightguide]

Maybe its been mentioned, I'm not great at reading through this many posts.
Stories out there China may revert back to coal.
Things like that make me seriously wonder what the point is when it comes to the US. Do these climate obsessed politicians really think we can slow/prevent anything, or is it just a matter of getting the dollars of all the green lobbyists in their pockets?
Because there's not a person in congress on either side of the fence who does anything because their altruistic

One of the central reasons is coal, the most carbon-intensive fossil fuel. Coal accounted for 58% of China’s total primary energy consumption as recently as 2019 – even as coal use was collapsing elsewhere. China currently operates 1,058 coal plants, roughly half of all coal plants worldwide. To meet even its modest climate goals, it will have to shut down more than half of them, according to a recent analysis by TransitionZero, a U.S.-based thinktank.

https://theconversation.com/china-f...m-and-why-us-china-talks-are-essential-161332

 

[ll74]

Shut up with the demented bullshit. I know as much about this as you do and more.

The proposed "actions" are destroying civilization. What's happening in Sri Lanka is a harbinger of what is going to happen everywhere else people like you buy into this utter bullshit that our civilization can survive without fossil fuels and the imposition of the Green New Deal.

They aren't destroying anything but your demented brain

Sri Lanka was the result of an antiNGO grifter with too much influence on government policy