Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[basilio]

The IEA (International Energy Agency) says that unless we make far reaching changes to energy supplies within the next 5 years Global Warming will spiral out of control. In particular we have to stop the next proliferation of coal fired power stations that are planned for India China and anywhere else.

"As each year passes without clear signals to drive investment in clean energy, the "lock-in" of high-carbon infrastructure is making it harder and more expensive to meet our energy security and climate goals," said Fatih Birol, IEA Chief Economist. The WEO presents a 450 Scenario, which traces an energy path consistent with meeting the globally agreed goal of limiting the temperature rise to 2 °C. Four-fifths of the total energy-related CO2 emissions permitted to 2035 in the 450 Scenario are already locked-in by existing capital stock, including power stations, buildings and factories.

http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2011/executive_summary.pdf

The Age offered an overview of the IEA report.

''The door to 2C is closing,'' the IEA warned on Wednesday, in its World Energy Outlook 2011. ''If stringent new action is not forthcoming by 2017, the energy-related infrastructure then in place will generate all the CO2 emissions allowed in the 450 Scenario up to 2035, leaving no room for additional power plants, factories and other infrastructure unless they are zero-carbon, which would be extremely costly.''

Frightening, coming from the conservative advisory body relied on by the fossil fuel industry, whose data on emissions and energy is regarded as the ''gold standard'', as The Guardian reported this week under the headline: ''World headed for irreversible climate change in five years, IEA warns.''

Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/t...an-we-think-20111111-1nbhp.html#ixzz1dXnpeTnb

Maybe this is the real investment direction we need to make in the next 20 years.

 

[JTLP]

The IEA (International Energy Agency) says that unless we make far reaching changes to energy supplies within the next 5 years Global Warming will spiral out of control. In particular we have to stop the next proliferation of coal fired power stations that are planned for India China and anywhere else.



http://www.worldenergyoutlook.org/docs/weo2011/executive_summary.pdf

The Age offered an overview of the IEA report.


Read more: http://www.theage.com.au/business/t...an-we-think-20111111-1nbhp.html#ixzz1dXnpeTnb

Maybe this is the real investment direction we need to make in the next 20 years.

Yawn yawn yawn. Self fulfilling agencies and government departments = money divested into crap to line their mates pockets.

Explain the Ice Age when man was probably lighting camp fires only? Carbon out of control then?

Cut me a break - Global Warming is a crock that lets the Lefty "Socialists' secretly make bank because they are closet capitalists.

 

[So_Cynical]

Global warming was always a little unstoppable due to the nature of warming and how far down the warming road we have already travelled, i mean you cant put the Genie back in the bottle any more than you can put back into long term storage all the carbon that has been released, carbon that took nature millions of years to store.

Denial denial denial...is also unstoppable.

 

[explod]

Yawn yawn yawn. Self fulfilling agencies and government departments = money divested into crap to line their mates pockets.

Explain the Ice Age when man was probably lighting camp fires only? Carbon out of control then?

Cut me a break - Global Warming is a crock that lets the Lefty "Socialists' secretly make bank because they are closet capitalists.

You allways yawn Champ, but did you ever read the "Sixth Extinction" as I suggested a number of times over the last year or two.

Till you have informed yourself you cannot discount the reality of what may be happening today.

 

[sails]

I don't know why we need yet another thread on this subject - maybe it should be merged with the other one. I suppose Basilio doesn't like the other thread header. I often think lefties like their propaganda to be on thread headers even though they are in the minority according to opinion polls.

And do we really have global warming that is any different to historical long term warming and cooling cycles of our globe?

The article link below is from Forbes by James Taylor which states co2 emissions have risen around 33% in the last decade and yet termperatures have remained flat during the same period.

IMO, this would indicate that rising levels of co2 are having little, if any, effect on our globe's temperatures and it also states that temperatures have not risen as per computer modelling.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions Up Sharply, Yet Temperatures Are Flat?

Methinks Basilio is part of a political campaign to guilt Australians into accepting a tax that is going to have little to do with the environment and everything to do with crippling this country financially.

How can paying for carbon credits going to reduce atmospheric co2? It doesn't make sense. China has received $6 billion from the EU in carbon credits since 2005. And yet co2 has risen in that time? Doesn't seem to be working, imo.

And if anyone thinks these billions of dollars are going to magically appear without any pain from the Australia electorate at large, they are off with the fairies, imo.

 

[Boggo]

Let me get my head around this, Australia gives $ foreign aid to China, Chinese carbon pollution is expected to increase by 70% by 2020 and we pay a tax on carbon.

Is it just me or is something not right with this whole scenario ?

 

[JTLP]

You allways yawn Champ, but did you ever read the "Sixth Extinction" as I suggested a number of times over the last year or two.

Till you have informed yourself you cannot discount the reality of what may be happening today.

Never saw you suggest the book - safe to say I won't pick it up. I'm here for a good time - not a long time - so don't need some negative nancy trying to scare me.

I'll refuse to believe anything to do with global warming whilst it remains the easiest money grab of all time.

Let me get my head around this, Australia gives $ foreign aid to China, Chinese carbon pollution is expected to increase by 70% by 2020 and we pay a tax on carbon.

Is it just me or is something not right with this whole scenario ?

Everything is right mate. It's you that is wrong. Now be quiet - pay the carbon tax and be prepared to ride a bike to power your computer in 10 years.

 

[sails]

Let me get my head around this, Australia gives $ foreign aid to China, Chinese carbon pollution is expected to increase by 70% by 2020 and we pay a tax on carbon.

Is it just me or is something not right with this whole scenario ?

You're not the only one, Boggo. According to the last Nielsen polls in the middle of last month, 59% of Australians do not want a carbon tax and 84% of LNP voters oppose.

 

[DB008]

Let me get my head around this, Australia gives $ foreign aid to China, Chinese carbon pollution is expected to increase by 70% by 2020 and we pay a tax on carbon.

Is it just me or is something not right with this whole scenario ?

Your spot on Boggo.

I also posted a Terry McCrann article in which he pointed out that China 'increased' CO2 more than out total output in just one year. Even if were to emit zero CO2 tomorrow, it wouldn't make a difference.

Sails has also posted a few links in which the whole carbon credits scheme is a farce. It's a joke.
I think that instead of buying credits offshore, why not put the money to use here, in this country by planting trees, building solar powerplants, geothermal...etc etc...

 

[sails]

Danny, I agree.

I cannot see how money changing hands can possibly have the slightest effect on co2 in the atmosphere regardless of whether it really is an issue or not.

How can trading credits change atmospheric co2? And it seems from the thousand pages of bills that were passed in the senate that labor doesn't expect any increase in renewable energy. I guess that means people will pay more for coal fired electricity while we trade credits to PRETEND we are meeting our targets. Seems that co2 in the atmosphere is not really the issue.

From Senator Barnaby Joyce's website:

Prior to the passage of the carbon tax, the amount of renewable (or as the government likes to describe it 'clean') energy that would be generated by our nation by 2020 was 50 terawatt hours, according to a report for the government by SKM MMA.

Yesterday, the Senate passed over 1000 pages worth of law, titled the Clean Energy bills. On the passage of these clean energy bills, the amount of clean energy generated in Australia by 2020 will be 50 terawatt hours.

That's right it is exactly the same amount. The clean energy bills will encourage exactly zero additional supply of electricity generation from clean energy sources.

Read more: Clean energy and the effect of yesterday's vote

Is this any better than a Nigerian scam? Let's hope the coalition can repeal this legislation that seems it is designed to hurt Australia financially far more than it will do to reduce atmospheric co2.

 

[wayneL]

Chicken Little comes to mind.....

 

[sails]

Chicken Little comes to mind.....

LOL Wayne - and yet they want us to think the sky won't fall in with this carbon tax and they think it will all be forgotten by the time the 2013 election comes around.

They have this funny idea that a tax that is going to put something like $24 billion into revenue won't be noticed.

No wonder these sort of people have been hood winked into the excuse for said tax...

 

[So_Cynical]

Danny, I agree.

I cannot see how money changing hands can possibly have the slightest effect on co2 in the atmosphere regardless of whether it really is an issue or not.

Then im afraid its official...you just don't get it.

In your world price increases have absolutely no affect on consumption....its not the price tag that stops people living in Double bay and driving ferraris.

 

[basilio]

I started the discussion with the IEA energy report. The IEA is considered an independent world authority on energy resources. It is certainly no Government think tank. If anything it is aligned to the fossil fuel industry

If you look at its research and publications you'll find a number of extensive analysis of energy issues.

It just so happens that the major issue they are highlighting right now is the extreme risk of unstoppable global warming if we don't make drastic changes to how we produce energy.

And the response to date from the usual suspects (not everyone of course) is that the IEA has got it absolutely and totally wrong. That global warming on the scale they are suggesting will never happen. That we have nothing to worry about.

Big call.

 

[sails]

Basilio,

Are you saying that you don't believe the U.S. Department of Energy? Are they part of your usual suspects?

From the link below (bold is mine):

The U.S. Department of Energy has just published its estimates of global carbon dioxide emissions for the year 2010, concluding emissions rose by 6% from 2009 to 2010. This constitutes the largest rise yet recorded and means global emissions are rising faster than any of the scenarios advanced by the United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) in its 2007 report. Global warming activists are claiming the 2010 rise proves global warming is even worse than previously feared, but exactly the opposite is the case.

Carbon Dioxide Emissions Up Sharply, Yet Temperatures Are Flat?

 

[qldfrog]

I started the discussion with the IEA energy report. The IEA is considered an independent world authority on energy resources. It is certainly no Government think tank. If anything it is aligned to the fossil fuel industry...

Big call.

Fully agree with you; the IEA is a fossil fuel ally if any and definitively not a green, left wing etc ec (whatever the usual rant can be added here)but when people are in denial, nothing will change their mind;
I am afraid it is indeed too late, people will bury their head in the sand till the end.People are still smoking and smokers with lung cancer do still deny any link with their own addiction.The real question is : is mankind worth saving?

 

[sptrawler]

We can't get China, the major poluter, to say hello to the dalai lama or revalue their currency.
Maybe you think us bashing ourselves with a carbon tax will somehow encourage them to change their energy policy.
Best of luck with that.
Don't frett, I believe you will have more immediate problems than global warming, in the forseable future.
Imported foreign labour coming to a workplace near you is my call, Asia pacific trading union not unlike the EU.

 

[Aussiejeff]

We can't get China, the major poluter, to say hello to the dalai lama or revalue their currency.
Maybe you think us bashing ourselves with a carbon tax will somehow encourage them to change their energy policy.
Best of luck with that.

Maybe that should read "flagellate ourselves"? LOL

Don't frett, I believe you will have more immediate problems than global warming, in the forseable future.
Imported foreign labour coming to a workplace near you is my call, Asia pacific trading union not unlike the EU.

Almost Trade Union-like.....

Big Bro eat yer heart out....

 

[sails]

Fully agree with you; the IEA is a fossil fuel ally if any and definitively not a green, left wing etc ec (whatever the usual rant can be added here)but when people are in denial, nothing will change their mind;
I am afraid it is indeed too late, people will bury their head in the sand till the end.People are still smoking and smokers with lung cancer do still deny any link with their own addiction.The real question is : is mankind worth saving?

And when people are stuck with their head in the sand thinking that Australia can do something about this without the major polluters, they are in even worse denial than they think of those with more common sense.

Australia emits 1.3% of global co2 emissions. Our target (at great expense) is 5% of our tiny 1.3% slice of the pie - that's 0.65%.

Below is a pie chart based on wiki info. See the little orange slither? That is Australia's 1.3%. And imagine that divided further by 20 to give 5% - that is our 2020 target at huge expense to this country. Futile? I think so.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_countries_by_carbon_dioxide_emissions

 

[sptrawler]

Yes Aussiejeff, don't think Julias statement about workers moving from country to country is a one way street.

She said the future workforce "will need to be a workforce that is highly adaptable, highly resilient because the pace of change will stress people".

"I think it will be a workforce increasingly mobile, it will be more and more common for countries to have guest worker arrangements. It will be more and more common for people to choose to live part of their life in another nation, so more mobile but in all of that I stress again, we can't forget the foundation skills," she said.

And Ms Gillard had an uncompromising message to people seeking work in countries such as Australia.

"If you don't have the ticket that gets you into the rest of the conversation, and that comes in the way of literacy and numeracy, then the rest of it will always be locked away from you," she told the business leaders.

She could have finished the line with" If you do have ticket that gets you into the rest of the conversation, the rest will be unlocked for you"

Anyway sorry I think I am getting off thread.