Sign in to follow this  
Malcolm

Climate Change?

Recommended Posts

See the 'Georgia Guide Stones', someone out there appreciates the one and ONLY answer to Earth's predicament.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The rest of the world moves ahead....

http://www.bloomberg.com/news/articles/2016-10-25/record-green-power-installations-beat-fossil-fuel-for-first-time

Renewable energy reached an important turning point last year with record new installations of emissions-free power surpassing sources that burn fossil fuel, according the International Energy Agency.

New installations of renewable energy overtook conventional power for the first time in 2015, the Paris-based agency said Tuesday in its Medium-Term Renewable Energy Market Report. Global green power rose by a record 153 gigawatts, equivalent to 55 percent of newly installed capacity last year. Total installed capacity exceeded coal for the first time, the IEA said.

“We are witnessing a transformation of global power markets led by renewables and, as is the case with other fields, the center of gravity for renewable growth is moving to emerging markets,” IEA Executive Director Fatih Birol said.

 
488x-1.png

The report shows the acceleration toward clean-power generation was already picking up pace before governments agreed in Paris in December to reduce carbon dioxide emissions. Renewables will be the world’s fastest-growing source of electricity over the next five years, according to the report.

The IEA raised its estimate of the amount of green energy on power grids by 13 percent, revising its forecast to 42 percent by 2021. About 500,000 solar panels were installed each day across the globe in 2015, according to the report.

Renewables capacity will be supported by falling costs, according to the agency. Solar panels are projected to be a quarter cheaper over the five year forecast period ending in 2021. Onshore wind-turbine prices may drop 15 percent.

Much of the growth will be driven by four countries, the IEA said, identifying China, the U.S., India and Mexico as clean-energy hotspots over the next five years. Growth rates in the European Union, an early policy supporter and adopter of clean-energy technologies, may decline.

 

The IEA’s regional conclusions include:

CHINA

  • The nation is seen as the “undisputed global leader” and is expected to account for 40 percent of the growth going forward, according to the IEA. Public pressure stoked by rampant urban air pollution has prompted the government to accelerate policies favorable to clean energy.
  • Last year, China’s installation “corresponds to two wind turbines every hour,” said Paolo Frankl, head of the IEA’s renewable energy division, in a conference call.

U.S.

  • The U.S. government’s solar and onshore wind tax-credit extension in December also supported the industry. That decision was responsible for about 43 percent of the IEA’s forecast revision.
  • Even as the U.S. market initially slowed, with developers no longer rushing to close projects in time for the subsidy, the IEA expects it to have the second-largest global growth rate with a 50 percent increase in capacity over the forecast period ending in 2021.

INDIA

  • Renewables in India are projected to expand by 76 gigawatts by 2021, led by solar power which is seen growing eightfold. Prime Minister Narendra Modi has set a target to install 175 gigawatts by 2022, up from 45 gigawatts presently. 
  • India has plans to bolster its solar manufacturing industry with $3.1 billion of state aid. Weak grid infrastructure and distribution risks may limit deployment, the IEA said.

MEXICO

  • Mexico’s clean energy capacity is forecast to nearly double by 2021, adding 15 gigawatts. A recent reform of the power industry and the implementation of an auction system has resulted in some of the lowest prices for electricity generated from solar and wind on record.

EUROPE

  • The EU is expected to increase its installed renewables by 21 percent in the medium-term, down from 62 percent over the past six years. The IEA points to weak growth in electricity demand, as well as policy uncertainty.
  • Brexit, Germany’s measures to lower the cost of renewables on consumers and Poland’s limits on wind and solar projects are seen as potential downside risks affecting growth. The trade bloc has a target to generate 27 percent of its energy consumption from clean sources by 2030.
Before it's here, it's on the Bloomberg Terminal. LEARN MORE
 
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

And in Ontario, Green Energy installations are responsible for driving up energy costs and forcing business out of the province.  

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The problem lies in methodology. Wynne tried to build Rome in a day, when it should have been stretched over generations . Pure stupidity on her part.

Edited by Jaydee
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

"A source close to the French government told Reuters that nothing had been decided yet on the carbon tax but confirmed there were doubts about it."

"In the current context, it is difficult, due to concerns about employment, legal difficulties and security of supply," the source said."

 

http://mobile.reuters.com/article/idUSKCN12K2OG

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Words from the wise: 

Brian Mulroney urges 'prudence' on carbon price decision

Climate change polices have to be 'in communion' with trading partners, says Canada's 18th PM

By Catharine Tunney, CBC News Posted: Oct 28, 2016 5:13 PM ET Last Updated: Oct 28, 2016 5:13 PM ET

 

Former prime minister Brian Mulroney announced the $60-million Brian Mulroney Institute of Government and Mulroney Hall at St. Francis Xavier University in Antigonish, N.S. this week. (Darren Calabrese/Canadian Press)

The man once voted Canada's "greenest" prime minister says there's a potential danger for this country to force a price on carbon if the United States doesn't follow suit.

"We know that as soon as we render ourselves uncompetitive and our neighbours ready to pounce, then we're in difficulty at home," Brian Mulroney told host Chris Hall on CBC Radio's The House, after announcing plans for a new institute and hall named in his honour at St. Francis Xavier University this week.

 

Earlier this month, Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said provinces have until 2018 to adopt a carbon pricing scheme or the federal government will step in and impose a price for them. Provinces have the option of crafting a cap-and-trade system or putting a direct price on carbon pollution.

The premiers of Saskatchewan and Nova Scotia have criticized the government's plan to set that price at $10 per tonne starting in 2018, rising by $10 each year to $50 a tonne by 2022.

 

Prime Minister Brian Mulroney seen here with Canadian ambassador to the U.S. Derek Burney in 1989. The acid rain treaty Mulroney reached with the U.S. is seen as part of his environmental legacy. (Ron Poling/The Canadian Press)

'Keep an eye' on U.S.A

Mulroney said Canada should move with "prudence" on the file and "keep a close eye on what's happening in the United States of America," where neither Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump nor Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton are interested in introducing a national price on carbon.

"Geography can't stop the flow of air and the movements of the waters and the oceans. What we do has to be in communion with other great trading nations," Mulroney said in the interview airing Saturday morning. "I am for a pristine environment, always have been, and am ready to listen to any reasonable arguments." 

In 2006, Corporate Knights, a magazine put out by high-profile environmentalists, crowned Mulroney Canada's "greenest" prime minister, largely due to the 1991 signing of the Acid Rain Accord with former U.S. president George Bush to reduce emissions of sulphur dioxide and nitrogen oxides. 

The former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada leader also played a role in the Montreal Protocol, a United Nations agreement that phased out of the production of a number of substances harmful to the earth's ozone layer. 

"My government was, I think, ahead of the curve, I hope anyways, on these important climate change issues," said Mulroney.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Oh come on

Everyone knows that the solution is to tax the crap out of everybody (Alberta)

Set up a phony trading scheme (B.C.)

Raise electricity rates and drive businesses away (Ont)

 

 

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Rule of unintended consequences from the ivory tower in Queens Park: revamp electrical system, move to "green" energy to cut down on nasty GHGs, but in the process, make electricity so expensive it forces rural people to use other heat sources, ie wood releasing GHGs, which the liberals were trying to eliminate in the first place.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

'Keep an eye' on U.S.A

Mulroney said Canada should move with "prudence" on the file and "keep a close eye on what's happening in the United States of America," where neither Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump nor Democrat candidate Hillary Clinton are interested in introducing a national price on carbon.

 

http://www.cbc.ca/news/politics/brian-mulroney-carbon-price-america-1.3824790

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here is something that is puzzling me. It appears that there is universal acknowledgement that more people = more air pollution. It also seems to be accepted that we in Canada are adopting some very hard targets regarding reducing our impact on the environment, yet at the same time our Government is looking to increase the number of immigrants coming to Canada which will only result in a larger population and of course a larger strain on the environment. This seems to be counterproductive.  I don't see anything in our reduction plans that compensates for a larger population.  Although our per capita numbers will go down, our total emissions will increase or to put it another way, our planned reduction will be less than planned.

The math would be easy: Total population at year start: Actual + expected births - deaths (annual averages from Stats Canada) = projected total for the year. If as result of this calculation the annual total was less than the start number,  the difference would = the number immigrants to be allowed in during the calendar year. If the same or higher then no immigrants during that year.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Trudeau will have no choice but to dramatically alter his totally unrealistic targets given Trumps election. It's either that or watch business after business migrate to the US for lower corporate tax rates and NO penalizing carbon tax.

Edited by Jaydee
  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, Jaydee said:

Trudeau will have no choice but to dramatically alter his totally unrealistic targets given Trumps election. It's either that or watch business after business migrant to the US for lower corporate tax rates and NO penalizing carbon tax.

That didn't hold back Wynne in Ontario and I doubt that the Dippers in Alberta care either

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, Malcolm said:

Here is something that is puzzling me. It appears that there is universal acknowledgement that more people = more air pollution. It also seems to be accepted that we in Canada are adopting some very hard targets regarding reducing our impact on the environment, yet at the same time our Government is looking to increase the number of immigrants coming to Canada which will only result in a larger population and of course a larger strain on the environment. This seems to be counterproductive.  I don't see anything in our reduction plans that compensates for a larger population.  Although our per capita numbers will go down, our total emissions will increase or to put it another way, our planned reduction will be less than planned.

The math would be easy: Total population at year start: Actual + expected births - deaths (annual averages from Stats Canada) = projected total for the year. If as result of this calculation the annual total was less than the start number,  the difference would = the number immigrants to be allowed in during the calendar year. If the same or higher then no immigrants during that year.

Holy crap Malcolm! Congratulations! You're starting to ask the right questions! ....now you just need to start trying to see our globe without all those imaginary political boundaries on it, and keep following through with your train of thought.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, Mitch Cronin said:

Holy crap Malcolm! Congratulations! You're starting to ask the right questions! ....now you just need to start trying to see our globe without all those imaginary political boundaries on it, and keep following through with your train of thought.

Mitch: my POV in this regard has not changed.  I see the same thing worldwide, at the same time I also see those who talk the talk, not walking the walk. No plans to reduce births, give up their gas powered cars / mowers / toys etc. So I can not see any success worldwide in lowering the impact of humans on the planet baring a world wide war, plague, the earth moving it's magnetic north pole (happened in the past), etc etc etc.  I continue to do what I can but........ few others do.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

To never let this discussion die and to emphasize this idea of CARBON TAX (Carbon, one of the most prolificic molecules in the UNIVERSE!), another point of view:

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/world/antarctic-ice-has-barely-changed-due-to-climate-change-in-last-100-years-new-analysis-shows

 

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I have seen 3 studies in the lat 48 hours on Arctic Sea Ice.  All draw different conclusions.  Who the heck do you believe.  Everyone has an agenda.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, boestar said:

" I have seen 3 studies in the lat 48 hours on Arctic Sea Ice.  All draw different conclusions.  Who the heck do you believe.  Everyone has an agenda."

You are absolutely right about conflicting studies. It's all relative to who one trusts. Politicians could care less about the environment. They care about one thing and one thing only, another opportunistic tax grab to push their personal agendas forward. When politicians and celebrities start "walking the walk"  instead of just "talking the talk", only then will the average man on the street join in the cause.

Edited by Jaydee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, boestar said:

I have seen 3 studies in the lat 48 hours on Arctic Sea Ice.  All draw different conclusions.  Who the heck do you believe.  Everyone has an agenda.

 

Lots of conflicting ones on the Arctic Sea Ice but the one posted by Moon was about the "antarctic" and appears to, at least for now, be unrefuted. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Posted on Premier Brad Walls Facebook page today. What Canadians are really thinking. What the Trudeau government doesn't want made public.

IMG_4090.JPG

IMG_4091.JPG

IMG_4092.JPG

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The notion of population control wasn't even mentioned, which makes it abundantly clear that all the pomp, ceremony and taxes that'll be squeezed out of the working stiff are all components of an obvious scam; Trudeau has nice hair though ...  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Jaydee said:

Trudeau still intent on taxing Canadians into oblivion

The Liberals have never met a tax they didn't like

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
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.

Sign in to follow this