Is Global Warming becoming unstoppable?

[rederob]

Australia is being portrayed as the worse country in the world with implementing reductions to CO2 emissions, which is probably true, but is it fair? The greenies like to use CO2 per capita to show how bad Australia is, ignoring that Australia is a resource rich country supplying the world, mining and agriculture being major contributors to Australia's CO2 emissions. But perhaps a better guide would be CO2 per square KM, if you think of each country's surface area as a bar heater, heating the planet with CO2. Then the following table is interesting and paints a different picture with Australia not so bad after all:

Nation or Territory	CO2 emissions per km2 (tonnes of CO2)	Total fossil CO2 emissions (million tonnes of CO2)
1. Singapore	89764.5	64.8
2. Bahrain	44689.6	34.5
3. Hong Kong	38978.8	43.0
4. Qatar	11180.3	129.8
5. Trinidad and Tobago	7933.2	40.7
6. Taiwan	7502.1	271.5
7. South Korea	6148.1	616.1
8. Kuwait	5858.2	104.4
9. Netherlands	3859.2	164.0
10. Belgium	3279.5	100.1
11. Israel	3204.3	66.6
12. Japan	3189.4	1205.1
13. United Arab Emirates	2796.5	231.8
14. Germany	2239.0	799.4
15. Lebanon	1879.5	19.5
16. Brunei Darussalam	1772.4	10.2
17. United Kingdom	1571.4	384.7
18. Czech Republic	1368.1	107.9
19. Italy	1180.0	355.5
20. Poland	1044.5	326.6
21. China	1025.2	9838.8
22. Switzerland	970.6	40.1
23. Austria	833.9	69.9
24. Denmark	801.7	34.6
25. Malaysia	772.0	254.6
26. India	750.3	2466.8
27. Slovakia	724.5	35.4
28. Slovenia	720.6	14.6
29. France	651.3	356.3
30. Bangladesh	611.5	88.1
31. Viet Nam	603.3	198.8
32. Portugal	593.8	54.9
33. Greece	576.0	76.0
34. Turkey	573.8	447.9
35. Ireland	565.4	39.7
36. Spain	557.5	281.4
37. USA	547.1	5269.5
38. Hungary	541.2	50.3
39. Bosnia and Herzegovina	521.2	26.6
40. Serbia	510.3	45.1
41. North Korea	481.3	58.0
42. Iraq	444.9	194.5
43. Bulgaria	442.4	49.1
44. Azerbaijan	441.2	38.2
45. Estonia	438.0	19.8
46. Dominican Republic	436.5	21.3
47. Philippines	425.4	127.6
48. Iran	408.0	672.3
49. South Africa	374.1	456.3
50. Sri Lanka	352.7	23.1
51. Ukraine	351.4	212.1
52. Thailand	350.1	330.8
53. Romania	336.8	80.0
54. Cuba	329.3	36.5
55. Saudi Arabia	323.9	635.0
56. Oman	306.8	65.2
57. Croatia	303.9	17.2
58. Belarus	295.6	61.4
59. Indonesia	253.6	486.8
60. Mexico	248.6	490.3
61. Pakistan	247.3	198.8
62. Jordan	231.4	21.4
63. Uzbekistan	221.3	99.0
64. Egypt	218.3	218.7
65. Lithuania	205.4	13.4
66. Guatemala	191.7	20.9
67. Venezuela	175.0	159.6
68. Tunisia	172.0	28.1
69. Georgia	157.1	11.0
70. Syria	150.7	27.9
71. Turkmenistan	148.9	72.7
72. Morocco	140.5	62.7
73. Norway	138.3	44.8
74. Ecuador	136.8	38.8
75. Finland	135.9	46.0
76. New Zealand	134.0	36.0
77. Panama	128.6	10.1
78. Nigeria	116.2	107.3
79. Chile	111.8	84.6
80. Kazakhstan	107.7	292.6
81. Russian Federation	99.1	1692.8
82. Honduras	95.2	10.7
83. Sweden	92.2	41.5
84. Argentina	73.8	204.3
85. Colombia	71.3	81.2
86. Ghana	70.0	16.8
87. Algeria	63.2	150.6
88. Canada	57.4	572.8
89. Brazil	55.9	476.1
90. Australia	53.7	413.1
91. Kyrgyzstan	52.6	10.4
92. Peru	50.4	64.8
The Whole World	242.7	36153.3

Note: Those nations or territories with less than 50 tonnes of fossil CO2 emissions per square kilometer and those with a total of less than 10 million tonnes of fossil CO2 emissions are not included.

I hope you are not serious.

If you are, then I think a better metric is CO2 per kangaroo.
Failing that, CO2 per panda.
Or CO2 per bald eagle.
They are a bit unfair, however, so we should use a ubiquitous metric which, of course, is CO2 per honest politician.

 

[sptrawler]

They are a bit unfair, however, so we should use a ubiquitous metric which, of course, is CO2 per honest politician.

Or indeed CO2, per unbiased and objective contributor.

 

[Wedgy]

I Actually think CO2 per unit of GDP is probably the best guide, Australia would not be the worse better than China, Russia. Equal to US but behind most countries.

 

[sptrawler]

I Actually think CO2 per unit of GDP is probably the best guide, Australia would not be the worse better than China, Russia. Equal to US but behind most countries.

To get an agreement on carbon pricing, some transparent and accurate methodology, will have to be arrived at IMO. it will be interesting to see what they come up with.

 

[sptrawler]

Ten years is a long time in global warming, the science is in somewhat, things are changing whether anyone can accurately predict what will happen, is another issue .
I guess it does prove it is o.k to be completely off the mark, if you are a scientist, but if you are a politician well god help you if you make a slip up.
No one disagrees with global warming, but only some are allowed the luxury, of claiming to have all the answers, without the resulting public shaming if they are proven slightly off the mark.

The post isn't about global warming, but about the amount of rope some people are given, when they are in synch with the narrative.

Landline - 11/02/2007: Interview with Professor Tim Flannery . Australian Broadcasting Corp

From the article:
First Published: 11/02/2007

SALLY SARA: Well, making good use of water is one of the subjects of this week's interview. Professor Tim Flannery has warned climate change will impact on Australia to the point where Sydney can expect to receive 60 per cent less rainfall than it does at present. If that's the case, what about the bush? What can Australian farmers expect as weather patterns alter? I spoke with Professor Tim Flannery about climate change, water and the intriguing subject of carbon trading. Professor Flannery, congratulations firstly on being named as Australian of the Year.

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: Thank you very much.

SALLY SARA: What will it mean for Australian farmers if the predictions of climate change are correct and little is done to stop it? What will that mean for a farmer?

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: We're already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we're getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that's translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That's because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that's a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we're going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.


November 2021:

Forbes residents told to prepare for flooding as deluge swells river to more than 10 metres

Rain keeps pouring and floods worsen for parts of New South Wales, threatening similar levels to the disastrous 2016 floods.

www.abc.net.au

From the article:
A major flood warning is in place for the Central West New South Wales community of Forbes, threatening similar levels to the disastrous 2016 floods.

"We're keeping a very close eye on the Lachlan River."

The Lachlan River runs through part of the town so floods are not unusual for the area.

The last major flood in Forbes was in 2016 when properties were inundated.

Overflowing Wyangala Dam, near Cowra, has turned the Lachlan River into a wild stretch of whitewater.(Supplied: John Batcheldor)
It experienced similar conditions in 2012 and back in the '90s.

 

[rederob]

Ten years is a long time in global warming, the science is in somewhat, things are changing whether anyone can accurately predict what will happen, is another issue .
I guess it does prove it is o.k to be completely off the mark, if you are a scientist, but if you are a politician well god help you if you make a slip up.
No one disagrees with global warming, but only some are allowed the luxury, of claiming to have all the answers, without the resulting public shaming if they are proven slightly off the mark.

The post isn't about global warming, but about the amount of rope some people are given, when they are in synch with the narrative.

Landline - 11/02/2007: Interview with Professor Tim Flannery . Australian Broadcasting Corp

From the article:
First Published: 11/02/2007

SALLY SARA: Well, making good use of water is one of the subjects of this week's interview. Professor Tim Flannery has warned climate change will impact on Australia to the point where Sydney can expect to receive 60 per cent less rainfall than it does at present. If that's the case, what about the bush? What can Australian farmers expect as weather patterns alter? I spoke with Professor Tim Flannery about climate change, water and the intriguing subject of carbon trading. Professor Flannery, congratulations firstly on being named as Australian of the Year.

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: Thank you very much.

SALLY SARA: What will it mean for Australian farmers if the predictions of climate change are correct and little is done to stop it? What will that mean for a farmer?

PROFESSOR TIM FLANNERY: We're already seeing the initial impacts and they include a decline in the winter rainfall zone across southern Australia, which is clearly an impact of climate change, but also a decrease in run-off. Although we're getting say a 20 per cent decrease in rainfall in some areas of Australia, that's translating to a 60 per cent decrease in the run-off into the dams and rivers. That's because the soil is warmer because of global warming and the plants are under more stress and therefore using more moisture. So even the rain that falls isn't actually going to fill our dams and our river systems, and that's a real worry for the people in the bush. If that trend continues then I think we're going to have serious problems, particularly for irrigation.


November 2021:

Forbes residents told to prepare for flooding as deluge swells river to more than 10 metres

Rain keeps pouring and floods worsen for parts of New South Wales, threatening similar levels to the disastrous 2016 floods.

www.abc.net.au

From the article:
A major flood warning is in place for the Central West New South Wales community of Forbes, threatening similar levels to the disastrous 2016 floods.

"We're keeping a very close eye on the Lachlan River."

The Lachlan River runs through part of the town so floods are not unusual for the area.

The last major flood in Forbes was in 2016 when properties were inundated.

View attachment 132916
Overflowing Wyangala Dam, near Cowra, has turned the Lachlan River into a wild stretch of whitewater.(Supplied: John Batcheldor)
It experienced similar conditions in 2012 and back in the '90s.

La Niña cycles are part of our climate landscape on the eastern seaboard, as is also the case for El Niño.
All you have done is cherrypick a comment that climate change deniers have trotted out on a regular basis since 2007. It's a pathetic smear that lacks context as even though Flannery said what he did, it was in relation to a climate trend which is backed by over a century worth of data and the ongoing climatic influence of CO2.
In your own WA, here's that trend:

On the east coast we see this (note how the 2016 La Niña anomaly sticks out like a sore thumb):

In 2007 Flannery gave a 10 minute interview to the WWF where he explained in a lot more detail what he thought about climate and related matters. Although this was 14 years ago he pretty well nailed most issues and even was on the money in discussing new energy potential.

 

[SirRumpole]

I Actually think CO2 per unit of GDP is probably the best guide, Australia would not be the worse better than China, Russia. Equal to US but behind most countries.

I think we get a lot of hassle for selling coal, when the focus should be on the countries that burn it.

After all, we don't blame Europe, the US or Japan for the emissions from those countries vehicles that we import.

 

[sptrawler]

La Niña cycles are part of our climate landscape on the eastern seaboard, as is also the case for El Niño.
All you have done is cherrypick a comment that climate change deniers have trotted out on a regular basis since 2007. It's a pathetic smear that lacks context as even though Flannery said what he did, it was in relation to a climate trend which is backed by over a century worth of data and the ongoing climatic influence of CO2.
In your own WA, here's that trend:
View attachment 132931
On the east coast we see this (note how the 2016 La Niña anomaly sticks out like a sore thumb):
View attachment 132932
In 2007 Flannery gave a 10 minute interview to the WWF where he explained in a lot more detail what he thought about climate and related matters. Although this was 14 years ago he pretty well nailed most issues and even was on the money in discussing new energy potential.

As I stated, the post wasn't about climate change per sae, it was about the fact that if the comments had been by a politician, they would have been attacked endlessly.
But because the statement was made by someone, that the media use on a regular basis as a source of reference for the narrative they wish to push, the obviously flawed statements, are as you say taken in the overall context of the issue.
The media would be doing a better service for the public, if they adopted this approach to all their reporting, it would also lift the overall standard of their content.IMO

 

[rederob]

As I stated, the post wasn't about climate change per sae, it was about the fact that if the comments had been by a politician, they would have been attacked endlessly.

First, it is exactly about climate change as that was the theme of the interview:

SALLY SARA: What will it mean for Australian farmers if the predictions of climate change ... ​

The issue was done to death a long time ago, and Flannery never backed off because what he said remains relevant to the context.
Had a politician made the comment it would have resolved in no time as the context would not have allowed it to turn into a climate science denier's beat up.

But because the statement was made by someone, that the media use on a regular basis as a source of reference for the narrative they wish to push, the obviously flawed statements, are as you say taken in the overall context of the issue.

It's not a flawed statement. Anyone with an ounce of nous will know that the question asked "what about the bush? " And Flannery answered it in the context of climate change as a trend. Many farmers committed suicide and many went bankrupt in the ensuing period due to prolonged drought in the bush. That pattern is highly likely to return in the next El Niño cycle.

The media would be doing a better service for the public, if they adopted this approach to all their reporting, it would also lift the overall standard of their content.IMO

What nonsense. You have repeated a beat up that gets the rounds from climate change denying media at every opportunity and from nowhere else.

Your claim was that Flannery was off the mark, yet what he said would happen in the bush did happen. FYI a more detailed explanation of Flannery's context is here.

Some recent comments at ASF relate to the ability to "analyse". The regurgitation of out of context Flannery comments is classic example of this.

 

[sptrawler]

As per usual you go wandering off on your own tangent, I never mentioned anything about "the dams never filling again, I actually never made a direct mention to anything he said.
I posted a couple of articles, to highlight the fact that the media are inconsistent in the way they treat subjects, actually the way you are making it now about climate change, reflects a similar problem.

 

[rederob]

As per usual you go wandering off on your own tangent, I never mentioned anything about "the dams never filling again, I actually never made a direct mention to anything he said.
I posted a couple of articles, to highlight the fact that the media are inconsistent in the way they treat subjects, actually the way you are making it now about climate change, reflects a similar problem.

Here's your quote:

The post isn't about global warming, but about the amount of rope some people are given, when they are in synch with the narrative.

Everything Flannery said related to the specific question about climate change (the "narrative") and its effect on farmers in the bush.
Flannery got it right.

What exactly was your purpose in linking an interview that is now 14 years old which was in fact about climate change?

Media organisations are not inconsistent in how they treat subjects. Murdoch media has shitcanned climate change at every opportunity as has Fox News. The ABC attempts to achieve balance. Other commercial media are looking for a "headline" and seldom otherwise delve into the detailed underpinning of the story. Why you want to rely on the media when there are actual science-based sites you could go to if you want to know more about the state of climate is a mystery.

 

[sptrawler]

As I said, the issue wasn't about climate change, or indeed about Flannery, the issue was as I said about the fact if a politician made a similar comment they would be torn to shreds by the media.
As per usual, you go off on your own tangent and make it all about you, you have your right to your opinion, unfortunately you don't extend that courtesy to others. ?

 

[rederob]

As I said, the issue wasn't about climate change, or indeed about Flannery, the issue was as I said about the fact if a politician made a similar comment they would be torn to shreds by the media.

Why?
Flannery was right.
You seem to be misunderstanding whatever point you think you are making.

 

[sptrawler]

I was showing that when someone makes a statement, the context in which it is made often is more important than the comment in isolation, as IMO it should be and you have explained so well.
The media on the other hand, decide which subjects they are going to apply that ideology to, which then plays into the hands of the fanatics amongst us and leads to anger and frustration.
It would be better for the country as a whole, if the media took a pragmatic approach, rather than trying to incite unrest I just think it is counter productive.
Also I don't think one media is any less antagonistic than another, they are all the same, it is just the fanatics they are directing their coverage to that differs.
Fortunately I think the majority of pragmatics, fall in the middle ground.

 

[rederob]

The media on the other hand, decide which subjects they are going to apply that ideology to, which then plays into the hands of the fanatics amongst us and leads to anger and frustration.

Climate science is not an ideology.
I have tried to work out what point you are making and am lost.
Who exactly are the "fanatics"?
Is it the media?
Flannery certainly was not in 2007 and is not today. Flannery - an environmentalist - is even on the record as suggesting that Minke whaling by the Japanese may be sustainable!

We just went through COP26. Surely there was something from that which must have been more relevant that an interview 14 years ago. What I am I missing?

 

[Investoradam]

La Niña cycles are part of our climate landscape on the eastern seaboard, as is also the case for El Niño.
All you have done is cherrypick a comment that climate change deniers have trotted out on a regular basis since 2007. It's a pathetic smear that lacks context as even though Flannery said what he did, it was in relation to a climate trend which is backed by over a century worth of data and the ongoing climatic influence of CO2.
In your own WA, here's that trend:
View attachment 132931
On the east coast we see this (note how the 2016 La Niña anomaly sticks out like a sore thumb):
View attachment 132932
In 2007 Flannery gave a 10 minute interview to the WWF where he explained in a lot more detail what he thought about climate and related matters. Although this was 14 years ago he pretty well nailed most issues and even was on the money in discussing new energy potential.

lol old Tim! like every other self proclaimed guru! they are nothing but a spruiker and a fraud who make a living for dribble endless ****!
like all climate predictions of the past 70 odd years! all have been wrong, never close and always. shifting the goal posts
ice age is coming, green house effect, ozone layer, global warming, global cooling etc

Professor Flim Flam moves to multi-million $$$ mansion in seaside Manly

Scared stiff about rising sea levels...... The chief architect of Zali Steggall’s climate strategy helped her draft a policy document that calls for the return of a national climate change authority, similar to the body he once led. Former climate commissioner Tim Flannery has moved into a...

www.michaelsmithnews.com

Flannery sticks by 'ghost' city

AUSTRALIAN of the Year Tim Flannery is sticking by his warning that Perth could become the first ghost metropolis of the 21st century.

www.perthnow.com.au

 

[Investoradam]

The ABC has a droll but very interesting analysis of just how easy it could be to make huge inroads into our carbon emissions.
And all the solutions are clever win/win deals that will make us far more cost effective and productive.
Have to say it is one of the most encouraging stories I have read.

How dung beetles, a tiny molecule and a giant extension cord could help solve our climate mess

Here's how Australia could become a renewable superpower by 2030. Sounds too good to be true? You tell us.

www.abc.net.au

there is a difference between fantasy and reality with a leftist! and its not reality as leftist politics never works and never ever has, has history shows!

like everything left they proclaim or speak nonsense through a small article and never go on to depth on how it will be achieved

 

[sptrawler]

Just read an article which really shows how ironic the media is and just how easily public opinion was influenced.
If you asked anyone in Australia, which PM did the most damage to climate change initiatives, without a doubt Tony Abbott would be everyone's response, yet the mechanism that he and Greg Hunt developed to reduce carbon emissions is the blueprint for Labor's current plan.
What a hoot, maybe the media could send Abbott an appollogy, enter the trolls stage left. Lol
It is an interesting article and highlights the politics of issues.
The other good thing to come out of the post, it made me learn how to copy and paste a url on an Android tablet, there is always a positive to be gained from even the worst periods of life.?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12...r-climate-policy-greg-hunt-retiring/100680684

 

[basilio]

Just read an article which really shows how ironic the media is and just how easily public opinion was influenced.
If you asked anyone in Australia, which PM did the most damage to climate change initiatives, without a doubt Tony Abbott would be everyone's response, yet the mechanism that he and Greg Hunt developed to reduce carbon emissions is the blueprint for Labor's current plan.
What a hoot, maybe the media could send Abbott an appollogy, enter the trolls stage left. Lol
It is an interesting article and highlights the politics of issues.
The other good thing to come out of the post, it made me learn how to copy and paste a url on an Android tablet, there is always a positive to be gained from even the worst periods of life.?

https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-12...r-climate-policy-greg-hunt-retiring/100680684

That was a very illuminating article. What it highlighted IMV was Greg Hunts cleverness in constructing a transparent, effective mechanism to racket down CC emissions by big emitters. The problem with the Liberal government was that they never actually used the process to create an orderly emissions reduction process. That was why Abbott was such a xxxx on CC.

Labour has decided that Greg's legislation is as good as it gets and intends to put it to work. How's that for bipartisianship
Wouldn't it be interesting to see Greg Hunt brought back into an offical CC position by a Labour Government to oversee the implementation of his legislation.

 

[sptrawler]

That was a very illuminating article. What it highlighted IMV was Greg Hunts cleverness in constructing a transparent, effective mechanism to racket down CC emissions by big emitters. The problem with the Liberal government was that they never actually used the process to create an orderly emissions reduction process. That was why Abbott was such a xxxx on CC.

Labour has decided that Greg's legislation is as good as it gets and intends to put it to work. How's that for bipartisianship
Wouldn't it be interesting to see Greg Hunt brought back into an offical CC position by a Labour Government to oversee the implementation of his legislation.

Let's be honest Bas, the reason it was never used was because the media never stopped bagging it as a handout to big business, that is the reason nothing gets done the media cranks up the ranters and chanters then when they are shown to be a bunch of dicks down the road they just change the chant.
Mindless rabble, is what they are, both the media and their footsoldiers.