Jump to content

Climate Change?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

 

“ Environmentalism: Every once in a while, environmentalists will let slip that the goal of fighting climate change can't be won unless capitalism is first defeated. The fact that there's no evidence to support the claim doesn't seem to matter.”

 

 

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/climate-change-crisis-capitalism/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Another Global Warming Study Casts Doubt On Media's Climate Change Fairy Tale

 

”  How do the study's authors know this? They corrected a mistake that many other studies and model forecasts leave uncorrected: First, they used only satellite data, the most comprehensive and accurate temperature numbers available. Then, they took out the temporary, yet significant, impact of both volcanoes and the El Niño and La Niña climate episodes that periodically wreak havoc on weather around the world. Once removing the influence of those naturally occurring events,  the study's authors were able to come up with a stable base temperature for the world. Doing this, they found that the rate of global warming currently was 0.096 degrees Celsius per decade — exactly what it was 23 years ago.”

 

 

https://www.investors.com/politics/editorials/another-global-warming-study-casts-doubt-on-medias-climate-change-fairy-tale/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Any sane individual with a brain knows full well Carbon Taxation is just another Government scam by Trudeau.

This just confirms it.

 

Federal government stands to make $280M from GST on carbon taxes in B.C., Alberta: 

The Liberals have long insisted Ottawa would collect no revenue from the carbon price they are requiring the provinces and territories impose by 2018

 

 

http://nationalpost.com/news/politics/federal-government-stands-to-make-280m-from-gst-on-revenue-neutral-carbon-taxes-in-b-c-alberta

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

“ Thankfully, most Canadian businesses keep ignoring politicians’ growth-killing climate crusade “ 

“ To be clear, what Musk actually unveiled were mocked-up props, pretending to be prototypes and housing none of the actual technology Musk promised would work, eventually. The Tesla founder’s gift for razzle-dazzle managed to get the audience to cheer, and journalists to go ga-ga, all for a cargo truck that might drive all of five hours on a single charge, as if it were the moonshot for history’s least ambitious generation. “While you’re unloading your cargo, you can charge (it)!” “Every truck we sell will have enhanced autopilot — standard!” And, of course: “Order now, get the truck in two years!”

As Post Driving columnist David Booth has noted, Musk’s claims about this yet-to-be-invented truck don’t even add up. “At current prices, the batteries alone could cost as much as US$200,000,” he calculated, compared to the US$120,000 price for an entire diesel rig. Those batteries, meanwhile, could weigh more than the entire payload, require charging technology that also doesn’t yet exist, and the closest charger we have to it now, at less than a third of the capacity, is “about the size of a small gas station kiosk and costs in the range of half a million bucks.” Another battery expert told Bloomberg that Musk’s roadster plan also relies on non-existent technology. But Tesla’s current business model isn’t about realism as much as using hype to suck up deposits from credulous fans, since bond markets have soured on company losses of US$8,000 a minute and its inability to keep to production schedules.”

 

 

http://business.financialpost.com/opinion/kevin-libin-thankfully-most-canadian-businesses-keep-ignoring-politicians-growth-killing-climate-crusade

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

McInnis cement plant to create jobs in Gaspé region, but Quebec's greenhouse gas emissions to rise by 6%

$1.45B Port-Daniel-Gascons plant to produce greener cement but will be worst industrial polluter in Quebec

CBC News Posted: Sep 25, 2017 5:31 PM ET Last Updated: Sep 25, 2017 6:34 PM ET

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard, left, looks out over the $1.45-billion installation at the inauguration of the McInnis cement plant in Port-Daniel-Gascons, Que., on Sept. 25, 2017.

Quebec Premier Philippe Couillard, left, looks out over the $1.45-billion installation at the inauguration of the McInnis cement plant in Port-Daniel-Gascons, Que., on Sept. 25, 2017. (Radio-Canada)

The long-awaited McInnis cement plant in Port-Daniel–Gascons, Que., is expected to create 200 jobs in the Gaspé region — but it's also predicted to produce more greenhouse gas than any other industrial operation in the province.

Premier Philippe Couillard was among those on hand today for the plant's official inauguration.

Built at a cost of $1.45 billion, much of that taxpayers' money, the plant is meant to produce a "greener" cement, using biomass instead of coal.

However, the cement plant will produce 1.8 million tonnes of greenhouse gases per year, making it the largest single emitter in the province.

That will increase greenhouse gas emissions in the province by an estimated two per cent — and emissions in Quebec's industrial sector will rise by six per cent.

The project was not subject to environmental review board hearings because it was initially proposed before the hearings process, known as BAPE, existed.

In 2015, the Couillard government passed a law reaffirming that the Port-Daniel–Gascons project would not be required to undergo an  environmental review.

McInnis Cement

The McInnis cement plant is expected to employ 200 people. (Joane Bérubé/Radio-Canada)

22-year wait

In 1995, a geological study found a substantial limestone deposit in the Port-Daniel-Gascons area, spurring then-premier Jacques Parizeau to put $1 million toward a feasibility study.

After some early work, including the construction of a dock in 1998, the project stalled for more than a decade.

In January 2014, Premier Pauline Marois announced the government would proceed with the project in partnership with the Bombardier family, which had by then acquired the cement project.

The Quebec government initially provided a $250-million guaranteed loan, and Investissement Québec provided a $100-million investment.

The Caisse de Dépôt, the agency that manages Quebec's public pensions, also invested $100 million in the project.

The Beaudoin-Bombardier merger company, Beaudier, provided $750 million in private financing.

Couillard's Liberal government maintained the deal after it was elected later that year.

The projected cost at the time that the project was approved by Marois was $1 billion — but that budget was exceeded by about $450 million.

The Caisse de Dépôt provided another $125 million, taking control of the project. A further $125 million in private financing was also invested.

McInnis cement plant inauguration

The McInnis cement plant was inaugurated on Sept. 25, 22 years after former PQ premier Jacques Parizeau first announced a feasibility study (Radio-Canada)

http://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/montreal/mcinnis-cement-plant-jobs-greenhouse-gas-1.4306422

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Biomass is one big hungry monster. Not sure about a cement plant, but for perspective, a biomass power plant will burn about 2700 hectares a year. "Green cement" via biomass (ie. burning the hell out of our trees) is an interesting spin on CO2 absorption... Don't know (or care) who's in charge there but this sounds like a liberal plan to me. 

Not to worry though, they will likely mandate the use of magic lightbulbs in all offices.

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

Ontario’s chance of meeting electric vehicle targets by 2020 is ‘zero,’ analyst says
 
Sun Dec 3, 2017 - The Globe and Mail
by Allison Jones
 
Ontario is envisioning a future in which millions of electric vehicles are on the roads, but analysts predict consumer uptake will remain far off the government target for 2020, despite tens of millions of dollars in subsidies.
 
The Liberal government has been encouraging electric vehicle sales by doling out $75-million in rebates to vehicle owners, offering various other incentives and programs, installing a network of charging stations and spending $1-million to open an electric-vehicle education centre.
 
But that so far hasn't translated into vast numbers of vehicles. The official data for 2017 aren't yet available, but at the end of last year, electric vehicles represented less than 1 per cent of all passenger vehicle sales in Ontario.
 
In just two years, by 2020, the government hopes to see that number increase to 5 per cent.
 
It can't be done, analysts say.
 
"The chances of meeting it aren't low, they're zero," auto industry analyst Dennis DesRosiers said. "In the auto sector, all roads lead to electric. It just happens to be that the road to serious acceptance of them is probably at least 2030 and more likely 2040, 2050."
 
Tony Faria, an auto industry analyst at the University of Windsor, agrees that Ontario won't meet its goal by 2020.
 
"We will almost assuredly get to 5-per-cent electric vehicles purchased or on the road at some point in time, it's just not going to be in the next couple of years," he said. "We're really wedded to our gasoline-driven vehicles because of the flexibility they give us distance-wise, amazing availability of where you can fill up and so on."
 
Range anxiety – a fear that an electric vehicle would run out of charge somewhere far from a charging station – is cited by analysts, the industry and government as one of the main reasons more people haven't yet switched to electric vehicles.
 
The government announced in July, 2016, that it would spend $20-million to build a network of 500 public charging stations along highways and at public places across the province by March 31, 2017.
 
But now, more than eight months after that self-imposed deadline, just two-thirds of the stations are in use.
 
.
 
Link to comment
Share on other sites

and here are a couple of reasons why electric cars are lagging behind.

 
July 7, 2017 3:13 pm
Updated: July 7, 2017 5:50 pm

Buying an electric car? Here are some factors Canadian drivers should consider

img_6786-e1496082127611.jpg?quality=60&sBy Maham AbediNational Online Journalist, Breaking News  Global Newsmore

The decision to switch from a traditional gas-powered car to an electric one can be daunting, considering the unfamiliarity and high costs. But it appears electric cars are gaining popularity.

Swedish car maker Volvo said all its new cars from 2019 will have an electric motor, ending altogether the manufacture of automobiles that have only a combustion engine. And the company isn’t alone. France also recently announced that it aims to end the sale of gas and diesel cars by 2040.

The announcements come as a forecast by Bloomberg New Energy Finance predicts electric cars will be as affordableas traditional gas-powered cars by 2025, and that sales will outpace gas vehicles by 2038

So should Canadians jump into the electric vehicles scene?

Electrical engineering professor Olivier Trescases says much of Canadians’ reluctance to make the change stems of costs.

Are affordable options available? 

While trends suggest electric vehicles are becoming more affordable, Canada has relatively limited options compared to other western countries, Trescases told Global News.

That means there aren’t many affordable options — yet. Many companies are beginning to offer lower prices, such as Tesla’s upcoming Model 3, which is slated to start around US$35,000.

“A lot of people have sticker shock,” Trescases said. “But you have to adjust your mindset.”

Trescases explained that maintenance costs for electric cars will likely be lower, and drivers won’t have to pay for gas.

Do Canadians get money incentives?

Some Canadian provinces offer incentives for drivers who opt for electric cars. The Ontario government offers a rebate of up to $14,000 for cars, and $1,000 off charging installations. Quebec offers up to $8,000 off cars, while British Columbia gives up to $5,000.

READ MORE: Ontario boosts incentives to people who buy electric cars

While the incentives have helped get Canadians on board, there has been backlash against them, Trescases notes.

“Basically that we’re subsidizing rich people to buy electric cars,” he said.

There are also some added costs. In June, Vancouver introduced a fee for using the city’s charging stations. Car owners will have to pay $2 per hour for a slow charge, and $16 per hour for a fast charge.

WATCH: BC Hydro’s electric car plug-in app

1800_BC_HYDRO_PLUGSHARE_VAF0BJLZ_848x480_889953347831.jpg?w=670&quality=70&strip=all

Is there proper infrastructure?

Charging stations — or in some cases the lack of them — is a legitimate cause for concern, although it’s not as bad as people may think, Trescases said.

Many Canadians who live in houses can install charging stations in their garage or just outside the home. New condominium buildings are also adding charging areas in parking lots.

READ MORE: Ontario misses deadline for electric vehicle charging stations

“It’s almost an increase in convenience. You can recharge at home,” the professor said.

Things are tricky for those who live in older buildings, and in areas without a public vehicle charging station.

The Ontario government had pledged to tackle the issue by building nearly 500 stations across the province, but missed the March deadline for the project. Only two-thirds of stations were completed on time.

Are electric vehicles practical in Canada?

Many Canadians are unsure of how well electric cars function in the winter, but Trescases explains that heated batteries work just as well in cold weather.

However, warming up batteries uses up more power, which means the car may need to be charged more often.

WATCH: Tesla’s first mass-market car poised for debut

Telsa_new_car_848x480_982312515981.jpg?w=670&quality=70&strip=all

Trescases says Canadians who drive 20-100 kilometres each day, and have access to a charging station, should have no problem with electric cars.

The catch is that electric cars with longer range (battery life) also cost more.

Tesla introduced the longest-range electric car on the market in January. The Model S 100D, with a range of 539 kilometres on full charge, costs $155,550.

and then comes some sad facts re "resale" value (used car trade in etc).

 

What to look for when shopping for a used electric car

STEVE MERTL
SPECIAL TO THE GLOBE AND MAIL
PUBLISHED JANUARY 31, 2017UPDATED MARCH 24, 2017

Electric vehicles made up fewer than 7,000 of Canada's 1.9 million annual new auto sales last year, but older EVs increasingly are finding their way into the used-car market.

Data supplied to Globe Drive by autotrader.ca shows searches on its car-sales website for battery-electric cars rose over the past six months from 0.05 per cent to 0.09 per cent of total searches. List views almost doubled to .23 per cent.

That's a drop in the bucket on a site that gets eight million visits a month, but its a definite upward trend. The Nissan Leaf and Tesla Model S are the most commonly searched and listed.

But does shopping for a used EV differ from kicking the tires on, say, a second-hand Honda Civic? What do you need to check besides the usual things, body damage, key systems such as the engine and brakes, and ensuring that all the instruments and controls function?

There are a couple of factors, and both pros and cons to choosing used over new.

In Ontario, Quebec or British Columbia, a new hybrid or EV purchase is eligible for thousands of dollars in incentives and rebates, with the maximum paid for battery-electrics such as the Leaf, Mitsubishi i-MiEV, Kia Soul or most Teslas. British Columbia's Scrap-It program tops up those spiffs if you're removing an internal combustion-powered vehicle off the road. Ontario and Quebec offer rebates for buying a residential quick-recharge unit.

None is available for second-hand EVs, perhaps out of concern for incentivizing the same vehicle twice. Even the charging-station rebate isn't available.

That has an impact on the used-EV market, says Brian Murphy, vice-president of editorial and research at Canadian Black Book, which tracks EVs and plug-in hybrids trends.

"They aren't holding their value, which is really what we expected," Murphy says. "To some degree, I'd say it's even going a little bit worse than what we expected."

The market appears to have deducted the provincial incentives from the depreciated value of the EV, he says. "If you get an $8,000 rebate that lowers the [new] price and then compare it to the used price, the used price is sort of net of the rebate already."

A new 2016 i-MiEV, for example, has a retail price of about $28,000 before rebates. Autotrader lists a low-mileage used 2016 in Quebec for $20,000, without rebates. Older models range from $15,000 to $16,000.

Some added depreciation is because of people who don't embrace the technology. Others are waiting for more advanced models such as the new Chevrolet Bolt, with a claimed range of 380 kilometres. Murphy calls it a game-changer.

"Especially as [a] used vehicle two or three years down the road, the Bolt is going to be more attractive to the marketplace than one of its competitors that may have half the range," he says.

But that depreciation can also make a used EV a bargain, assuming it's mechanically sound.

And the increasing number of publicly available charging stations is beginning to allay range anxiety, says Michael Bettencourt, managing editor at autotrader.ca, who recently traded a Leaf for a used Ford C-Max plug-in hybrid. It could make older, shorter-range EVs more attractive.

"All of a sudden, that same exact Leaf can become a lot more practical and a lot more useful to a lot of people," Bettencourt says.

 

Range in an EV is dependent on the battery's capacity, which raises the second big question mark when buying used: What shape is the power cell in?

A battery-EV is fairly uncomplicated, with fewer moving parts; simple electric motor, one-speed transmission and no engine-needing maintenance.

The battery lithium-ion battery pack, the single biggest component, is covered by extensive long-term warranties, usually eight years or 160,000 kilometres for replacement if charge capacity falls below 70 per cent.

The Leaf's battery's condition can be checked with a battery-capacity gauge on the right side of the instrument cluster. Its warranty kicks in if capacity falls below nine bars out of 12 on the gauge.

George Iny, of the Automobile Protection Association, says the Leaf stores its lifetime charging history, including quick charges that can damage the battery. A would-be buyer could ask for a readout.

If shopping used, check to see if the warranty is transferable. A replacement battery will cost upward of $5,000.

One way to hedge your bet is to buy through an auto maker's certified-preowned program, which generally offers a limited warranty. Nissan, Mitsubishi and BMW, for instance, include EV products in their programs.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

To reach their 'target' (something that they set themselves) the Ontario government and others will do what governments always do,  throw more money at the problem ie raise the subsidy.

 

Ontario is supporting publicly accessible EV charging infrastructure across the province with up to $100 million over five years. EVIP provides incentives of $6,000 to $14,000 to support the purchase or lease of eligible battery-electric and plug-in hybrid electric vehicles.Feb 1, 2017

Link to comment
Share on other sites

.

America Crowns a New Pollution King

Power plants have been the biggest source of U.S. CO2 emissions since the 1970s—until now.

Mon Dec 4, 2017 - Bloomberg News
By Tom Randall

For the first time in 40 years, power plants are no longer the biggest source of U.S. greenhouse gas pollution. That dubious distinction now belongs to the transport sector: cars, trucks, planes, trains and boats.  

The big reversal didn’t happen because transportation emissions have been increasing. In fact, since 2000 the U.S. has experienced the flattest stretch of transportation-related pollution in modern record keeping, according to data compiled by the U.S. Energy Information Administration. The big change has come from the cleanup of America’s electric grid.

The chart below shows carbon dioxide emissions from transportation exceeding those from electricity production in 2016 for the first time since 1978. The pollution gap has continued to widen further in 2017, according to a Bloomberg analysis.

800x-1.png


Electricity use in the U.S. hasn’t declined much in the last decade, but it’s being generated from cleaner sources. A dramatic switch away from coal, the dirtiest fuel, is mostly responsible for the drop in emissions. Coal power has declined by more than a third in the last decade, according to the EIA, while cleaner natural gas has soared more than 60 percent. Wind and solar power are also increasingly sucking the greenhouse gases out of U.S. electricity production.
 
This is good news, and not just because carbon dioxide emissions are the biggest contributor to global climate change. The shift to cleaner energy also has immediate local improvements to health by reducing the burden of asthma, cancer and heart disease.

The transportation sector is also entering a critical period of reformation. Cars are becoming more efficient under aggressive pollution rules passed under President Barack Obama, but that’s so far been offset by an ever-rising American appetite for SUVs, crossovers and pickup trucks. Even the nation’s clean-air policies could soon change. The Trump administration is considering rolling back the toughest fuel-efficiency standards, which are set to take effect in the early 2020s.

Investments in electric cars may soon begin to do to the transportation sector what wind and solar have done to the power sector: turn the pollution curve upside down. The price of battery packs has been plummeting by about 8 percent a year, according to Bloomberg New Energy Finance, and electric cars are now projected to become cheaper, more reliable, and more convenient than their gasoline-powered equivalents around the world by the mid-2020s.

800x-1.png

When the electrification of the U.S. auto fleet begins in earnest, pollution from the two biggest energy sectors—electricity and transportation—may ultimately converge. Those electric cars are going draw their power from the grid.

.

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada has 36 million people. China has 1.3 billion. The Liberals are phasing out coal in Canada, the 3rd coldest country in the world. But China gets a pass. Did Climate Barbie really think the Chinese were going to agree to phase out coal?

Canada produces 1.58% of the worlds emissions, which are absorbed by our trees making Canada effectively Carbon neutral...something the POLITICIANS IGNORE......

Meanwhile China produces 25% and STILL building new coal plants as we speak !!!...and they get a PASS by Climate Barbie ?????

And we're the ones paying a carbon tax?????

“there are 1,600 new coal plants being planned in 62 countries. Chinese power companies are behind 700 of the plants, and about 140 of those are not in China.”

 

https://www.nationalnewswatch.com/2017/12/05/china-not-able-to-join-canada-u-k-coal-phase-out-alliance-mckenna/

Edited by Jaydee
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

China coal-to-gas switch delayed to avert heating crisis
Coal-fired heating has been China's favourite fuel but the environmental concerns have pushed the government to convert to cleaner alternatives
The Chinese government has scaled back its ambitious plans to eradicate coal-fired heating for this winter amid shortage of gas.
Beijing had ordered the nation's northern provinces to convert from coal to cleaner fuel by the end of this year to reduce pollution.
However, in many places the transition has not completed or gas supplies proved inadequate,
Millions have reportedly been left without proper heating.
China's Ministry of Environment had issued a statement telling the northern regions that have not finished converting to gas or electric heating may burn coal, the South China Morning Post reported.
"Keeping people warm in winter should be the number one principle," the statement said.
Separately the Chinese National Petroleum Corp said on Thursday that the country might face shortage of gas if "extreme" cold weather hit the country.
As part of an ambitious plan to curb air pollution, the government started a coal-to-gas project that stretches across 28 provinces in the northern regions.
More than four million homes and thousands of factories have already set up gas-fired radiators, which has led to a surge of domestic gas prices to record highs since the start of the winter heating season in mid-November.
Share this story About sharing  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42266768

Link to comment
Share on other sites

59 minutes ago, Malcolm said:

China coal-to-gas switch delayed to avert heating crisis
Coal-fired heating has been China's favourite fuel but the environmental concerns have pushed the government to convert to cleaner alternatives
The Chinese government has scaled back its ambitious plans to eradicate coal-fired heating for this winter amid shortage of gas.
Beijing had ordered the nation's northern provinces to convert from coal to cleaner fuel by the end of this year to reduce pollution.
However, in many places the transition has not completed or gas supplies proved inadequate,
Millions have reportedly been left without proper heating.
China's Ministry of Environment had issued a statement telling the northern regions that have not finished converting to gas or electric heating may burn coal, the South China Morning Post reported.
"Keeping people warm in winter should be the number one principle," the statement said.
Separately the Chinese National Petroleum Corp said on Thursday that the country might face shortage of gas if "extreme" cold weather hit the country.
As part of an ambitious plan to curb air pollution, the government started a coal-to-gas project that stretches across 28 provinces in the northern regions.
More than four million homes and thousands of factories have already set up gas-fired radiators, which has led to a surge of domestic gas prices to record highs since the start of the winter heating season in mid-November.
Share this story About sharing  http://www.bbc.com/news/world-asia-42266768

 

“  China is planning 210 new coal-fired power plants despite existing overcapacity. Why? “

 

https://cleantechnica.com/2016/04/18/why-is-china-still-building-new-coal-plants/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

“ Is fake news okay if the cause is good? “

“ The trouble is that wild exaggerations and scare stories are not just bad for science. They're bad for all of the environmentalists who want to win over the goodwill of the public. Most people are concerned about climate change – but they're also rightly skeptical about activists who cry "wolf" (or, in this case, "polar bear.") Fake news for a good cause can backfire and shred your credibility. That's something nobody who's concerned about the environment can afford to forget. “

 

https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opinion/is-fake-news-okay-if-the-cause-is-good/article37290997/

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

The global climate change industry is worth an annual $1.5 trillion, according to Climate Change Business Journal. That’s the equivalent of $4 billion a day spent on vital stuff like carbon trading, biofuels, and wind turbines. Or — it’s the same amount the world spends every year on online shopping.

But there’s a subtle difference between these two industries — the global warming one and the online shopping one. Can you guess what it is?

Well, it’s like this. When you go to, say, Charles Tyrwhitt to buy a nice, smart shirt, or Amazon to buy the box set of Game of Thrones, or Krazykrazysextoy.com to replace your girlfriend’s worn out rabbit, no one is holding a gun to your head. You are buying these things of your own free volition either for yourself or for someone you love. You have paid for them, out of your own money, because you have made the calculation that they will make your life that little bit better. Better than it would, say, if you’d kept the money in your bank account or spent it on something less desirable — a novelty dog poo ornament, say, or a handknitted sweater with Jimmy Savile’s face on it and “I HEART paedos” picked out in gold lamé lettering.

When, on the other hand, you buy stuff from the climate change industry, you have no choice in the matter whatsoever. It’s already priced into your taxes, your electricity bills, the cost of your petrol, the cost of your airfare, the cost of every product you buy and every service you use. It is utterly inescapable, this expenditure. Yet unlike your online shopping — which, remember, costs roughly the same as you spend each year on the climate change industry — you get precisely nothing in return.”

 

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/08/08/climate-change-the-hoax-that-costs-us-4-billion-a-day/

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, gator said:

 

I'm assuming that you have heard of Breitbart before.... why would anyone quote Breitbart if they wanted to be taken seriously? 

But, of course, it's Jaydee.... just regurgitating headlines from questionable sources.

Well Wox....er Gator ....instead of shooting the messenger and the source  ( Climate Change Business Journal ) why not refute the claim ? Are they right or wrong ?

 

“ The global climate change industry is worth an annual $1.5 trillion, according to Climate Change Business Journal. That’s the equivalent of $4 billion a day spent on vital stuff like carbon trading, biofuels, and wind turbines.  — it’s the same amount the world spends every year on online shopping.”

 

Edited by Jaydee
Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/16/2017 at 5:12 PM, Jaydee said:

Yet unlike your online shopping — which, remember, costs roughly the same as you spend each year on the climate change industry — you get precisely nothing in return.”

A true consumerist view... If one can't touch it, drive it, wear it, show it off or use it to pump up their ego, it isn't worth spending money on.

Yet, I don't see the reason to compare the two. It's like comparing the amount of money spent on grass seed (the front lawn kind) to the amount spent on bourbon. (BTW yearly online sales are $2.6 trillion this year).

Yeah, we do spend money on protecting the climate. Maybe if we had started paying attention earlier, we wouldn't have to spend so much on it today and going forward. If we continue to ignore the problem, the costs will only go up.

... and for those who can't see past the gleam of the fancy watch that they bought on line, what you get in return on climate protection spending is higher quality of life for your descendants.

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.

Guest
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.

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...