Jump to content

Climate Change?


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

21 hours ago, st27 said:

The real elephant in the room is controlling population growth

Ironically, through the power of petroleum, the world can easily handle more people. We've had 3 generations of seatbelt and helmet laws though, I think that's the problem. Revoke those laws and we can do it, don't and I concur with your assessment. 

My problem with greenies is that they're always looking for the easy out, never willing pay the bills, and incapable of applying their own rhetoric to their own life. Let's start with big stuff that has a big effect and that we can do right now... like today. This is where we cowboy up, this is analogous to getting up at 0400 and going to the gym. That's what dedicated busy people do. Or don't... simply put those colour coordinated Lululemon's back in the cedar chest and leave the rest of us alone. That's fine too.

https://nationalpost.com/news/world/mass-made-of-billions-of-wet-wipes-the-size-of-two-tennis-courts-change-course-of-the-thames

So, stop manufacturing meaningless targets you know you won't hit and ridiculing people who point out that you haven't hit a single one yet. Do stuff that matters today.... start by driving the speed limit because If you can't do that, you certainly can't do the hard stuff. 

Stop flushing stupid things down the toilet, you know damn well you wouldn't be doing that if you were on a septic system. Stop pumping raw sewage into our oceans, stop pouring industrial effluents into our rivers. When you're ready to put the same energy into that as you are in banning straws in Dogpound Alberta (yes it's a real place) we can get stared on this thing. In like manner, if you're still at the gym 6 months after you start we can talk about supplements. If supplements is your first question I know you won't be there in 6 months. For the record, to me supplements are like AR 15s, I'm proficient but have no use for them.

 

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

Rex Murphy: The green radical mindset

Rex Murphy - 7h ago
 
 
image.png.f149d91bbb5d2ae473f8bee9cfe54b03.png
Extinction Rebellion climate activists demonstrate in Glasgow during the COP26 climate summit on Nov. 13, 2021.
© Provided by National PostExtinction Rebellion climate activists demonstrate in Glasgow during the COP26 climate summit on Nov. 13, 2021.

What and who gave Vladimir Putin the power he has today?

The answer is easy. It was a direct and undebatable consequence of the sanctimonious green policies of most Western governments, and their leaders.

Canada provides a great illustration.

Since 2015 our sweet, misgoverned country has put (and how vacant this phrase is, almost as vacant as the objective it sets) “reducing Canada’s greenhouse gas emissions” as its policy holy of holies.

Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, his former adviser Gerald Butts, former environment minister and climate-warrior Catherine McKenna, and her even more fervid replacement, Steven Guilbeault (“you may remember me from such roles as The Greenpeace Spider-Man”) — these four made that goal more than just policy: it is now far more dogma and doctrine, a conviction of such intensity that it is genuinely parallel to the deep convictions of seriously religious people.

In other words, more faith than science, but as with faith, it’s a creed that claims a status beyond argument, beyond rational measurement.

Religious people are not only explicit in declaring their beliefs, they exult in trusting what, by definition, cannot be proven. They understand and forthrightly declare that religion is a territory beyond, outside or above reason. That is the very nature of faith as a category.

The greeners however like to mix the categories, not only like to, but it is an essential weapon in their campaigns that categories should be confused. They ask you to “believe” in the threat of a climate Armageddon as at the same time insist with vehemence that it is “the science” that absolutely declares it an unarguable reality. You do not believe facts, you accept them. Facts require no belief, which is, curiously, why we call them facts.

Al Gore as long as 20 years ago was much given to uttering with Vatican-force confidence that “the science is settled.”

A declaration that ironically proved he was very unclear about the nature of science itself, which is always in the nature of a continuous searching, subject to undying scepticism, constant revision, and most powerfully — in the face of the dazzling complexity of the universe — utter humility as the ground base for the human attempt to know it fully.

There are many qualities of true-believer green devotees, but in that great catalogue humility finds neither welcome nor meaning.

Many have noted the deep similarities between the belief in a pending climate apocalypse and genuine religion. It is in fact a mime-religion, an ersatz faith, with all the negative energies that attend absolutist religions. That includes intolerance of disbelievers (they are “deniers” — perhaps the ugliest word in the modern lexicon). High sanctimoniousness. Investment in the most unlikely “prophets” (i.e. Greta Thunberg). And most crucial of all — utter and unflinching certitude.

It is a strange, if not weird mentality, and if it were restricted, as most faiths are these days to the personal domain, perhaps not something that those who do not subscribe to its edicts would have to bother much with, or indeed would wish to.

But it is an altogether different matter when it is within this mindset, this mentality, that the public policy of an entire country, or entire countries, is determined. Determined and imposed as in Canada for the past six years in particular. That has come with such costs, financial and political, in the West of Canada. That has placed the development of this whole world’s most fundamental resource — energy — on a negative slope. That has barred pipelines, or as in the case of Trans Mountain messed it up altogether. A mindset that during this bleak COVID period, with an already battered economy, led the Liberal government to remorselessly proceed with a hike in the carbon tax.

In other words it has done everything possible to keep oil and gas in the Canadian ground. Much as other western and particularly European countries have madly chased a “renewables future” of windmills and solar panels that they do not yet have in place.

The green crusade is now showing its true cost. Putin, vile dictator that everyone says he is, stayed with oil and gas. The green ideology and the policies it bred established his current might, his capacity to blackmail Europe, to go to war against Ukraine, disrupt world economies, feed the post-COVID inflation of most countries, and put half the world in a justifiable anxiety about — the unthinkable — nuclear war.

And finally, the deepest irony — a lot of these same countries are now backing off their pious green professions, coal is making a necessary comeback, some nations are warning of energy rationing, and poor, sad Joe Biden (he killed the Keystone pipeline on the first day of his feeble presidency) is doing a genuflection to Saudi Arabia, and talking of a tax rebate on gasoline.

And here at home the carbon tax, aggravated by soaring inflation, is hitting the least able to take a hit. Gasoline will soon become a commodity for only the very well-off, and food prices — which are heavily related to energy costs — are in high acceleration. We are paying in so many ways for those four wise green minds who locked Canada into the folly faith of the green apocalypse.

But things are fine I am certain today at the Commonwealth summit in Rwanda. I hear Prince Charles is there, one of the very high cardinals in the church of green. He and Trudeau probably pray together.

National Post

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://thecountersignal.com/dutch-farmers-protest-climate-change-policy/

 

Dutch farmers are fighting for their very livelihoods, taking to the streets over a climate change policy that will cap nitrogen emissions and lead to mass job loss.

Dutch farmers protest insane climate change policy

Video shows several farmers on the streets attacking police and emergency vehicles with sledgehammers while others chase the vehicles down and launch kicks against the windows.

Dutch farmers have been protesting in the streets for days against the government’s plan to target the livestock sector with nitrogen emission cuts.

The Dutch government said “The honest message… is that not all farmers can continue their business,”.

In another video, farmers, who brought their own tractors, can be seen outside the Minister for Nitrogen and Nature policy’s house spraying what appears to be manure on the house and police vehicles while other protesters attempt to flip a car.

Dutch farmers protesting outside the home of the Minister for Nitrogen & Nature Policy against the govts plan to target the livestock sector with nitrogen emission cuts.

The plan could see up to 30% reduction in livestock farming & farms out of business.

According to Bloomberg, yesterday, several farmers also brought their cows to parliament to protest the policy, going so far as threatening to slaughter them on the spot.

“If the nitrogen measures are adopted, one of these two ladies [cows] will not go home but will receive a one-way ticket to the slaughterhouse,” farmer Koos Cromwijk told Dutch news agency ANP outside parliament.

The policy in question will require Dutch businesses to reduce nitrogen emissions nationwide by 50% and up to 95% in some provinces by 2030, with cows and fertilizers being significant contributors.

“The honest message … is that not all farmers can continue their business,” a government statement reads.

The agriculture industry isn’t the only one being targeted, though — aviation has also come under fire.

According to Climate Change News, by the end of 2023, Schipol airport, one of the busiest in Europe, will be forced to limit annual flights to accommodate just 440,000 passengers (12% less than the number of flights in 2019).

“This is a difficult message for the aviation sector that is still recovering from the far-reaching consequences of the coronavirus pandemic,” said transport minister Mark Harbers.

Climate change activists are, of course, thrilled by the developments, with Greenpeace calling the cap on airport traffic a “historic breakthrough.”

“It is good that the Cabinet realizes that Schiphol has, for years, been flying beyond all boundaries when it comes to noise, nitrogen, ultrafine particles and the climate,” Greenpeace activist Dewi Zloch said in a statement. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://thecountersignal.com/dutch-uprising/

 

 The Dutch people are rising up to protest destructive WEF climate law. We are going to share their story with the world.

 

The World Economic Forum controlled Dutch government announced last week an end to modern farming – putting harsh controls on nitrogen, and spelling the end to thousands of family farms. 

In response, Dutch farmers took a page out of the Canadian Freedom Convoy playbook. They took to the highways, blockaded borders, and launched massive protests. 
 

So far, the global media has vilified the farmers, brushing aside their concerns with the New World Order-style policy, and propagating government lines. 

Farmers are worried that this will is one step closer to a global food crisis and total government control of the food supply.

This is critical journalism, and it falls to The Counter Signal to tell the honest story. Please help us share the Dutch Uprising with the world.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

Pretty predictable eh?

Agriculture is a big emitter and was sure to become a target. I have always maintained that this will come down to a rural urban divide.... a better word might be clash.

As with the energy debacle in Europe, L/W loons are sure to make huge cuts before seeking alternatives or even acknowledging that they should (a bit like the police defunding madness),  Throw in a few unanticipated complications caused by the complete inability to manage (or even identify) vulnerabilities, and shortages become assured. Shortages will be felt more acutely in other parts of the world and at some point in the future, access to water will become problematic. In any discussion of inducements to war, access to food and water top the list.

When it all comes together, rural areas and farming communities have the ultimate upper hand in any struggle with people who rely on them for food.  That's what this will eventually come down to. 

It could galvanize farmers into a united front, almost like a militant union. If they become united by a common threat and course of action, they could easily bring the loons to their knees in pretty short order... I think that's where this is heading. 

For the most part, people think the great divide is in politics between the L/W loons and the R/W loons. Given time, they will come to see how little the cacophony of loons matter in the grand scheme of things.

 

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

Yeah, and the part about limiting traffic at Schipol airport to reduce emissions  - not all emissions, just the emissions in their country.  What this will do is cause airports in countries that don't care about emissions to expand and increase their connection traffic.  It's quite likely that this will increase global emissions by forcing people to connect at airports that increase the distance they need to travel.  Instead of connecting in Europe, which is efficient, you'll have to connect in Dubai. Good news, however, Schipol emissions will drop dramatically, along with tax revenue, employment opportunities, commercial entities, etc, etc.

On a similar note, Trudeau would be perfectly happy to see Air Canada and Westjet close their doors and be written into the history books.  Foreign carriers will do the international flying and United will be happy to do all the Vancouver, Calgary, Toronto and Montreal flying - with a connection through Denver.  Trudeau can brag about reducing the carbon emissions from the transportation sector and who cares about the inconvenience and cost for those neanderthals who choose to travel anyway.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The absurdity of it all renders further discussion moot IMO because we need to spend lots (and I mean lots) of money on upgrading infrastructure. If the grid can't handle daily requirements now, tell me how it will handle charging electric vehicles by the millions.

Then tell me what you propose to cut in order to hit Paris Accord targets... time is running out here and we need to get started (like yesterday).

Fact checking absurdity is simply a distraction to the absurdity itself and setting goals is useless without the will to obtain them. 

 

U.S. power grid operators warn of impending energy shortages this summer

Record-high temperatures are driving more and more Americans to turn on air conditioning units to keep cool, creating loads that the grid is unable to handle.

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Some interesting information about what to replace your single use plastic bag with. 

Quote

Ottawa recently announced it will phase out some single-use plastics by 2025, but finding sustainable alternatives is trickier than you might think. One of the single-use items on the banned list is the plastic checkout bag that many Canadians use for groceries and other kinds of shopping. Up to 15 billion plastic checkout bags are used every year in the country, according to government data.  Eco-conscious shoppers looking to replace the single-use plastic bag should consider the full life cycle of whatever they end up using, experts say. A 2020 study by the UN Environment Program found the environmental ranking of bags varies depending on which criteria you consider. For example, one type of bag may score well in cutting down on litter but be a poor option when it comes to water and land use to make it. The number of times a reusable bag is used is also crucial, the study found. On the lower end, a paper bag needs to be used four to eight times to have less impact on the climate than a single-use plastic bag. Meanwhile, a cotton bag needs to be used 50 to 150 times to be environmentally superior, according to the study. If you do need a plastic bag alternative, read here for a closer look at the pros and cons of some common options

 

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Quote

What's the best alternative to a single-use plastic bag? It depends

Eco-conscious shoppers should consider the full life cycle of whatever they use, experts say

 
cbc-gem.jpg
Eva Lam · CBC News · Posted: Jul 07, 2022 4:00 AM ET | Last Updated: 7 hours ago
 
plastic-bags-20190815.jpg
Canadians will need to find alternatives to the ubiquitous grocery checkout bag after the federal government announced it is banning some single-use plastic items. (Nathan Denette/The Canadian Press)
340
comments

Ottawa recently announced it will phase out some single-use plastics by 2025, but finding sustainable alternatives is trickier than you might think.

The ban, which targets six categories of plastics, is part of an effort by the Liberal government to achieve zero plastic waste by 2030. A study commissioned by Environment and Climate Change Canada showed that, in 2016, Canadians threw away three million tonnes of plastic waste, only nine per cent of which was ultimately recycled. The rest ended up in landfills, waste-to-energy facilities or the environment, where it can harm wildlife while taking hundreds of years to break down.

  • Have a question or something to say? Email: ask@cbc.ca or join us live in the comments now.

One of the single-use items on the banned list is the plastic checkout bag that many Canadians use for groceries and other kinds of shopping. Up to 15 billion plastic checkout bags are used every year in the country, according to government data.

They're also one of the major sources of plastic litter found on shorelines. In 2021, almost 17,000 plastic bags were collected during community cleanups.

Even before the federal government's move, some jurisdictions including P.E.I., Nova Scotia and a number of B.C. communities had already banned single-use plastic bags. Some major retailers such as Sobeys and Walmart have also stopped offering them.

The majority of Canadians are shifting away from single-use plastic bags, too. In a 2019 survey, 96 per cent of respondents said they used their own bags or containers when grocery shopping, though only 47 per cent of those said they always did so.


Examining the full life cycle 

The challenge for eco-conscious shoppers is that alternatives to single-use plastic bags also leave an environmental footprint.

A 2020 study by the UN Environment Program analyzed the findings of seven life cycle assessments (LCAs) on shopping bags published since 2010. An LCA assesses the environmental impacts of a product or services from, essentially, cradle to grave. This includes: 

  • Raw material extraction.
  • Production.
  • Logistics and distribution.
  • Use.
  • End-of-life.

The study found the environmental ranking of bags varies depending on which criteria you consider. For example, one type of bag may score well in cutting down on litter but be a poor option when it comes to water and land use to make it.

The number of times a reusable bag is used is also crucial, the study found. On the lower end, a paper bag needs to be used four to eight times to have less impact on the climate than a single-use plastic bag. Meanwhile, a cotton bag needs to be used 50 to 150 times to be environmentally superior, according to the study.


Given the impacts from all life cycle stages, one of the best options for shoppers would to skip the bag altogether whenever possible, said Tony Walker, an associate professor of environmental studies at Dalhousie University in Halifax.

"Reducing consumption of anything and everything is key because everything requires resources and energy to produce," said Walker, who advised the federal government on its Zero Plastic Waste Agenda and Oceans Plastics Charter.

If you do need a plastic bag alternative, here's a closer look at the pros and cons of some common options.

Cotton bag

The cotton bag has greater environmental impacts than other types of bags during production due to the high amount of energy required to grow, irrigate and fertilize the cotton.

However, its durability lends itself to hundreds, even thousands, of uses, which makes it an environmentally friendly alternative, says Walker.

As well, cotton bags are made from a renewable resource and are degradable at end of life, though the 2020 UN study notes it matters how it is disposed. Waste incineration for cotton bags is climate neutral and therefore a better option than landfilling, where the study says degradation of the cotton releases methane, a greenhouse gas that contributes to global warming.

Paper bag

Paper bags have a few things going for them: they can decompose easily, they can be put in compost bins depending on your jurisdiction and they can be recycled as paper, says Walker.

However, like cotton, they demand quite a bit of energy to produce. They also require forestry products as raw materials and take more fuel to transport than other, lighter materials.

 
tony-walker.jpg
Tony Walker, an associate professor of environmental studies at Dalhousie University in Halifax, advised the federal government on its Zero Plastic Waste Agenda and Oceans Plastics Charter. (Robert Guertin/CBC)

Another major drawback of paper is its low durability. 

"It kind of keeps us stuck in this single-use model," said Sarah King, head of Greenpeace Canada's oceans and plastics campaign. "I definitely encourage folks to think of what they already have and how they can incorporate that into their routine."

Reusable plastic bag or bin

Some retailers offer reusable bags made of plastic materials, including low-density polyethylene (LDPE), polypropylene (PP), polyethylene terephthalate (PET) and polyester. Others offer reusable plastic bins that shoppers can carry their items in.

Loblaws, which introduced a plastic-bag fee in 2007, has made both options available to customers. In response to a query from CBC News, the company said their black reusable President's Choice bag is 99 per cent PET fibre made from post-consumer recycled plastic, while their green plastic bins are made from high-density polyethylene.

Walker said a reusable bag having recycled content "is a fantastic thing, better than it going to waste."

But, "it is still made from a fossil fuel product, and so it would have to be disposed of very carefully at the end of life," he said.

Biodegradable bag

These bags are often marketed as eco-friendly owing to an ability to break down into harmless material faster than conventional plastics.

 
gp0stu20q.jpg
A pile of plastic and bioplastic bags collected during a cleanup at Vancouver's Kitsilano Beach in 2019. (Greenpeace)

But Walker says very few are actually 100 per cent "bio-based" — that is, derived from biological sources such as plants or algae — and instead may contain up to 25 per cent petroleum products, requiring specific conditions to break down at end of life in waste management or recycling facilities.

Indeed, a U.K. study published in 2019 tested the deterioration of biodegradable, oxo-biodegradable (containing additives for quicker breakdown), compostable and conventional plastic bags in four environments: the sea, soil, open air and controlled laboratory conditions. After three years, none of the bags showed any substantial deterioration across all of the environments.

Even when biodegradable bags degrade, unless they are 100 per cent bio-based, they risk leaking microplastic pollution into the environment, Walker said.

And there's another big caveat even for bags that are 100 per cent bio-based.

"You might be obtaining plant-based material that otherwise would have been land given over to food production — so that could cause food shortages in parts of the world with food insecurity — or it could have been virgin forest that was cut down to make this material," Walker said. 

"So it's not the panacea."

Consumers can drive change

Consumers have a lot of power to influence manufacturers and retailers to improve on some of these "first gen" alternatives, says one business expert.

"It's up to us as consumers to nudge this along with our own behaviour," said Barry Cross, an assistant professor and distinguished faculty fellow of operations strategy at the Smith School of Business at Queen's University in Kingston, Ont.

Cross also cited the potential role of some of the larger fast food and retail organizations like Lululemon, who have "the size and the reach to be able to influence some of those packaging developers and some of the innovation associated with coming up with new alternatives."

But is it enough? By the federal government's own estimates, the six categories of banned products only made up about three per cent of the total amount of plastic waste Canada created in 2019.

That will make it difficult for Canada to reach to goal of zero plastic waste by 2030, says Greenpeace Canada's King.

 
plastics-ban-20220620.jpg
Steven Guilbeault, federal minister of environment and climate change, announces the ban on some single-use plastics at a beach in Quebec City on June 20, as Health Minister Jean-Yves Duclos looks on. (Jacques Boissinot/The Canadian Press)

"Unless they add more items to the ban list, unless they actually set overall plastic production reduction targets and also invest in a transition to truly zero-waste systems that are centred on reuse, there's no way they will ever meet their 2030 goal," she said.

However, all three experts CBC News spoke to agreed the ban on plastic bags and the other five categories of single-use plastic is a positive thing, especially when it comes to changing the mindset around waste and pollution.

"This is low-hanging fruit — these items, many of us can easily do without," said Walker. "If we can do without those, then it will help the government and consumers start to think more carefully about the plastics that we use, especially single-use plastics that we can do without.

"So yeah, whilst it might be on paper only a small step forward, a step forward by any means is better than no action at all."

ABOUT THE AUTHOR

But Walker says very few are actually 100 per cent "bio-based" — that is, derived from biological sources such as plants or algae — and instead may contain up to 25 per cent petroleum products, requiring specific conditions to break down at end of life in waste management or recycling facilities.

Indeed, a U.K. study published in 2019 tested the deterioration of biodegradable, oxo-biodegradable (containing additives for quicker breakdown), compostable and conventional plastic bags in four environments: the sea, soil, open air and controlled laboratory conditions. After three years, none of the bags showed any substantial deterioration across all of the environments.

Even when biodegradable bags degrade, unless they are 100 per cent bio-based, they risk leaking microplastic pollution into the environment, Walker said.

And there's another big caveat even for bags that are 100 per cent bio-based.

"You might be obtaining plant-based material that otherwise would have been land given over to food production — so that could cause food shortages in parts of the world with food insecurity — or it could have been virgin forest that was cut down to make this material," Walker said. 

"So it's not the panacea."

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Posted (edited)

The alternative is the plastic bags I get now. They're easily twice as thick as the grocery store ones I used to re-purpose.

This has allowed me to double the amount of plastic waste I produce and double my footprint virtually overnight. Only a liberal could accomplish that. I still say give em what they say they think they might maybe want and make them pay for it. It is the quickest way to end this. 

In rereading the post, I discovered just how much I viscerally despise the word "re-purpose". Maybe because It's so regularly used by the same fools who are now "re-homing" the pets they got during the lockdowns and work from home craze they applauded.

The very people shouting the loudest about this seem to be save the planet vegans who are now lining up to take Fluffy and Binky to the SPCA in record numbers.  

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

  • 2 weeks later...

As Europe feels the heat, politicians are sweating. 

 

In the U.K., an emergency Cabinet meeting was called at the weekend to discuss Britain’s first-ever “Extreme Red” heat warning. In France, one lawmaker described the sweltering weather as “hell.” In Portugal, the prime minister is monitoring dangerous forest fires. 

With temperatures in Western Europe set to soar beyond 40 degrees Celsius this week, Southern Europe is already fighting the effects of more blistering summer heat, which scientists say is a result of the world’s changing climate.

https://www.politico.eu/article/five-countries-suffering-from-the-heat-wave-in-europe/

 

 

But but but……there’s this inconvenient tid bit we won’t talk about because we can’t tax that any more !!

Death for millions in 1921’s record heat wave

  • Immense areas, usually fertile, dried up in Europe and Asia, and famine stalks helpless people
  • Our own crops damaged
  • Even moist England has shortage of potable water, but Scandinavia and Germany get welcome rain in time to save their crops

https://weathernewsblog.wordpress.com/1921/09/04/death-for-millions-in-1921s-record-heat-wave/

3BF985C3-6CCE-45C0-87F6-0E7F971C4FAB.jpeg

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

https://www.rebelnews.com/trudeau_liberals_seeking_to_cap_oil_and_gas_sector_to_force_emissions_down_40_by_2030

Whether by cap and trade, or some other mechanism, this (and lots more) is required to hit accord targets. As in Holland, agriculture has to be severely limited as well so 40% across the board means exactly what it says.

Since there is simply no other way, If you're in favour the Paris Accord you are, by extension, in favour of these actions. I've repeatedly asked greenies what sectors of the economy they want to see cut in support of their goals to no avail, it now seems the government has decided for them.

The reality of it all is pretty brutal, after we've completely wrecked our economy we will have succeeded in lowering our percentage of world wide carbon emissions by about 0.5%. Missing in all the discussions is the fact that our land mass scrubs more carbon then we actually produce.

For the hunters in the crowd, it's like shooting mice with 405 grain 45-70 ammo, it certainly gets the job done but at a cost most reasonable people would consider foolish given other alternatives... like a cat.  

Like covid mandates, travel restrictions and the appetite to surrender hard won rights in the interests of a level of safety we never achieved, I'm actually pleased to say that none of this makes sense to me at any level.

Please carry on without me, I'm too busy putting up a chain link fence to keep mosquitos off the property to pay attention to this anymore.

 

Edited by Wolfhunter
  • Thanks 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/07/22/science/kylie-jenners-17-minute-private-jet-trip-is-climate-disaster/

 

The globe’s richest 1 percent have carbon footprints 175 times the size of those in the bottom 10 percent; private jets are one reason why.

Private jet trips were responsible for nearly 34 million metric tons of carbon pollution in 2016, according to one 2020 study, which is more than some countries emit in an entire year.

One 2021 study found that per passenger, private jets create up to 14 times more greenhouse gas pollution than commercial planes, and a stunning 50 times more than trains. And by one estimate, just two hours of flying private produces 2 metric tons of greenhouse gas pollution — as much as the average person on Earth generates in a year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

CO2 is CO2 is CO2— the Implications for Emissions Caps

Main Conclusions

  • CO2 is CO2 is CO2: all CO2 molecules are identical whatever their source.
  • To a height of roughly 100 km, the atmosphere is a “homosphere”: its composition is essentially the same throughout.
  • Any reduction in the CO2 put into the atmosphere will therefore have the same effect as any other.
  • If we decide to reduce the atmosphere’s CO2 content, economics suggests we do so in the least costly way.
  • As a real-word example demonstrates, a family would reduce its CO2 use by seeking the least costly ways to lower its CO2 output per activity, as well as the least costly activities that it could reduce or even eliminate.
  • A family that wanted to do this rationally would equalize the marginal cost of CO2 reduction across all its activities, cutting back more on those that are of least benefit to it and less on those that are of most benefit.
  • A country is not just a big family. The least costly ways of reducing CO2 output are known, not to governments, but only to individuals and firms, who have, as Friedrich Hayek put it, “knowledge of the particular circumstances of time and place".
  • If a government imposes a price on CO2 emissions equal to their marginal social cost, people and firms will go about finding the least costly way to reduce their emissions and no further intervention will be required.

https://www.fraserinstitute.org/studies/co2-is-co2-is-co2-the-implications-for-emissions-caps?utm_source=Fraser-Institute-Enews&utm_campaign=CO2-is-CO2-is-CO2&utm_medium=Fraser_Update&utm_content=Learn_More&utm_term=415

853F6AC9-1EA7-4589-9970-AD13FB0F2512.jpeg

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Frustration growing over feds' fertilizer crackdown

 

  • Calgary Sun
  • 24 Jul 2022
  • BRIAN LILLEY
img?regionKey=2oGTqwvdXOxSEuuxjoyZJA%3d%3dHEYWOOD YU/POSTMEDIA During a recent meeting with Federal Agriculture Minister Marie-claude Bibeau, above, in Saskatoon, provincial agriculture ministers expressed frustration over feds' plans to reduce fertilizer use by farmers in the name of fighting climate change.

Provincial agriculture ministers expressed frustration with the federal government over plans to effectively reduce fertilizer use by Canada's farmers in the name of fighting climate change.

A meeting of federal and provincial ministers wrapped Friday in Saskatoon with several provinces saying they are disappointed.

The federal government is looking to impose a requirement to reduce nitrous oxide emissions from fertilizers, saying it is contributing to climate change.

While the Justin Trudeau government said that it wants a 30% reduction in emissions and not fertilizer, farm producer groups said that reducing nitrous oxide emissions can't be done without reducing fertilizer use.

“Provinces were disappointed by the lack of flexibility and consultation regarding the federal target,” Ontario's Lisa Thompson said after the meeting.

Several provincial governments and organizations representing farmers have asked for emissions reductions from fertilizer to be measured by intensity — how much food is produced compared to the amount of fertilizer used. The Trudeau government is demanding an absolute reduction in emissions, which farmers said will result in less food being produced at a time when the world can't afford it.

“The world is looking for Canada to increase production and be a solution to global food shortages. The federal government needs to display that they understand this,” Alberta's Nate Horner said.

“We're really concerned with this arbitrary goal,” Saskatchewan's David Marit said.

Federal Agriculture and Agri-food Minister Marieclaude Bibeau called the government's target ambitious, but claimed it's one farmers will embrace.

“I'm meeting with many farmers in the field. I know how much they care for the environment and how much they invest in new practices and new technologies to reduce their emissions as much as possible,” Bibeau said. “The idea is to produce the most sustainable food in the world.”

Farm groups like the Western Canadian Wheat Growers have said the federal plan will reduce crop output, reduce income for farm families and increase food prices.

While ministers Thompson, Horner and Marit all ran successful farming and ranching operations before entering politics, Bibeau was an international development bureaucrat and operated a tourism-related business.

Similar plans to reduce fertilizer use have resulted in mass protests in Europe, in particular the Netherlands.

I'm meeting with many farmers in the

field. I know how much they care for the environment

and how much they invest in new practices and new technologies ...”

Marie-claude Bibeau, Federal Agriculture and

Agri-food Minister

  • Confused 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

As with firing nurses during a pandemic, truck drivers during a supply line crisis, defunding police during a crime wave, and paying veteran pilots less than truck drivers during a pilot shortage, the logic here escapes me.  

https://www.foxnews.com/us/us-food-supply-at-risk-amid-global-crackdown-on-agriculture-in-the-name-of-climate-change-dairy-farmer-says

Farmers are already struggling with input costs (fuel, fertilizer, labour, seed, etc), what kind of liberal math calculates that there won't be food shortages if a 70% production increase (over current) is required by 2050 to fend of global hunger. 

Solving the nurse, truck driver, police and pilot shortage is quick and easy compared to cost of growing and equipping new farmers... you can (almost) train a doctor for the price of a new tractor.  Any wonder Bill Gates is buying up agricultural land like crazy?

How do you increase production while simultaneously reducing production? And, with only 71/2 years to go on the Paris Accord targets, isn't it just about time to identify the sectors of our economy you want to see cut?

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

  • 2 weeks later...

Rather than attacking farmers and food production, the Trudeau climate activists are selectively choosing to ignore other industries, like our coal exports and another sector, which may affect his infrastructure plans (remember that boast, the infrastructure bank that would put thousands of Canadians to work rebuilding the country for a new green economy?)

Quote

If the cement industry were a country, it would be the third largest emitter in the world.

In 2015, it generated around 2.8bn tonnes of CO2, equivalent to 8% of the global total – a greater share than any country other than China or the US.

Cement use is set to rise as global urbanisation and economic development increases demand for new buildings and infrastructure. Along with other parts of the global economy, the cement industry will need to dramatically cut its emissions to meet the Paris Agreement’s temperature goals. However, only limited progress has been made so far.


 

 

https://www.carbonbrief.org/qa-why-cement-emissions-matter-for-climate-change
 

So tired of Trudeau picking winners and losers in the name of saving the planet and his image at the climate conferences….

Why not take a stand against loss of rainforests, internationally, and taking on the lumber interests in this country…..maybe he missed his public school science class and took drama instead.

Quote

Photosynthesis is vital for climate processes, as it captures carbon dioxide from the air and then binds carbon in plants and further in soils and harvested products. Cereals alone are estimated to bind 3,825 Tg (teragrams) or 3.825 Pg (petagrams) of carbon dioxide every year, i.e. 3.825 billion metric tons.[14]

 

  • Thanks 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

STOP THE INSANITY !!!

“‘NDP MP wonders if we still need indoor ice rinks given climate impact “

Bonita Zarrillo, the NDP Member of Parliament for Port Moody-Coquitlam, B.C., tweeted Tuesday: “Is indoor skating ice even a necessity anymore? Can every ice sport be done without ice and different equipment?…just pondering the climate impact of human-made indoor ice.”

https://torontosun.com/news/national/ndp-mp-wonders-if-we-still-need-indoor-ice-rinks-given-climate-impact

 

  • Confused 1
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...