Climate Change
- Started
- Last post
- 538 Responses
- Nairn3
"Amazon Announces $2 Billion Climate Pledge Fund to Invest in Companies Building Products, Services, and Technologies to Decarbonize the Economy and Protect the Planet"
https://press.aboutamazon.com/ne…
Good. I mean, of all the companies, Amazon's up there with some responsibility, so perhaps even $2Bn might be viewed as less than generous - but it's a start.
Now, Apple? Microsoft? Google? Softban... no, they'd only fuck it.
- I would love for Apple to go All-In on fusion. They could fully fund every fusion start-up on the planet.Nairn
- Apple could fully-fund every viable fusion start-up on the planet.. and it'd be pocket change for them, essentially.Nairn
- oh ffs - i refreshed a few times and the original note didn't appear! haha.Nairn
- Totally. And i know you don't mean those shitty fusion drives. "I want a full nuclear reactor in a phone, get on it" Steve JobsIanbolton
- Apple will only act based on returns accruedcannonball1978
- i_monk2
Re: blaming China
- TL! :)) do you just go copy my posts and repost them?grafician
- https://www.qbn.com/…grafician
- Here, repost this too: https://www.qbn.com/…grafician
- Are you new? Different threads.i_monk
- I can see the developing countries argument here...USA and Europe got wealthy by burning fossil fuels.yuekit
- At the same time if entire world population does the same we're all fucked.yuekit
- deathboy-11
The last few weeks the exonomist has been hitting climate change hard. Just surprised by some of the writing. Know it's all penned by different or groups but really seems to lack any regard for it's regressiveness to low income. One article sounded like giving my people carbon tax stimulus will keep the peons at bay noticing price increases. Really starting to see groups coordinate for political interests on covid19 which is alarming. Globaliat interests are no different than Chinese commies to me
- I stopped subscribing a couple of years back after 15-odd years of doing so. The Economist has *always* banged the Climate Change drum hard.Nairn
- your posts are so poorly written it’s painfulmonospaced
- they are for sure about the carbon trade and ambitions. but small fry reporting is great. why i like them. just the push and disregard for tact and subtleydeathboy
- is bothering me. seems almost desperate. and the levels of saying get our change by cutting a check to normies is bothersomedeathboy
- Nairn1
More good news!
https://www.reuters.com/article/…
"Energy consultancy Kayrros estimated one leak was spewing out 93 tonnes of methane every hour, meaning the daily emissions from the leakage were equivalent to the amount of carbon dioxide pumped out in a year by 15,000 cars in the United States."
Wait a second.. that's not good news.
- deathboy-8
interesting https://www.forbes.com/sites/mic…
Blocked article.
Had to look this guy up. My opinion is he is a shill for nuclear energy. Which based on science i support. I'm not to big on admitting a bias for funding than jumping boat and angle. But I think its good to check out the BS from oneside from a player and consider he is still slinging shit. and that these fuckin clown are paid funding grants to sell and promote bias 24-7. It's almsot always dishonest with an agenda
On Behalf Of Environmentalists, I Apologize For The Climate Scare
On behalf of environmentalists everywhere, I would like to formally apologize for the climate scare we created over the last 30 years. Climate change is happening. It’s just not the end of the world. It’s not even our most serious environmental problem.
I may seem like a strange person to be saying all of this. I have been a climate activist for 20 years and an environmentalist for 30.
But as an energy expert asked by Congress to provide objective expert testimony, and invited by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to serve as Expert Reviewer of its next Assessment Report, I feel an obligation to apologize for how badly we environmentalists have misled the public.
Here are some facts few people know:
Humans are not causing a “sixth mass extinction”
The Amazon is not “the lungs of the world”
Climate change is not making natural disasters worse
Fires have declined 25% around the world since 2003
The amount of land we use for meat — humankind’s biggest use of land — has declined by an area nearly as large as Alaska
The build-up of wood fuel and more houses near forests, not climate change, explain why there are more, and more dangerous, fires in Australia and California
Carbon emissions are declining in most rich nations and have been declining in Britain, Germany, and France since the mid-1970s
Adapting to life below sea level made the Netherlands rich not poor
We produce 25% more food than we need and food surpluses will continue to rise as the world gets hotter
Habitat loss and the direct killing of wild animals are bigger threats to species than climate change
Wood fuel is far worse for people and wildlife than fossil fuels
Preventing future pandemics requires more not less “industrial” agriculture
I know that the above facts will sound like “climate denialism” to many people. But that just shows the power of climate alarmism.
In reality, the above facts come from the best-available scientific studies, including those conducted by or accepted by the IPCC, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO), the International Union for the Conservation of Nature (IUCN) and other leading scientific bodies.
Some people will, when they read this imagine that I’m some right-wing anti-environmentalist. I’m not. At 17, I lived in Nicaragua to show solidarity with the Sandinista socialist revolution. At 23 I raised money for Guatemalan women’s cooperatives. In my early 20s I lived in the semi-Amazon doing research with small farmers fighting land invasions. At 26 I helped expose poor conditions at Nike factories in Asia.
I became an environmentalist at 16 when I threw a fundraiser for Rainforest Action Network. At 27 I helped save the last unprotected ancient redwoods in California. In my 30s I advocated renewables and successfully helped persuade the Obama administration to invest $90 billion into them. Over the last few years I helped save enough nuclear plants from being replaced by fossil fuels to prevent a sharp increase in emissions
But until last year, I mostly avoided speaking out against the climate scare. Partly that’s because I was embarrassed. After all, I am as guilty of alarmism as any other environmentalist. For years, I referred to climate change as an “existential” threat to human civilization, and called it a “crisis.”
But mostly I was scared. I remained quiet about the climate disinformation campaign because I was afraid of losing friends and funding. The few times I summoned the courage to defend climate science from those who misrepresent it I suffered harsh consequences. And so I mostly stood by and did next to nothing as my fellow environmentalists terrified the public.
I even stood by as people in the White House and many in the news media tried to destroy the reputation and career of an outstanding scientist, good man, and friend of mine, Roger Pielke, Jr., a lifelong progressive Democrat and environmentalist who testified in favor of carbon regulations. Why did they do that? Because his research proves natural disasters aren’t getting worse.
But then, last year, things spiraled out of control.
Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez said “The world is going to end in twelve years if we don’t address climate change.” Britain’s most high-profile environmental group claimed “Climate Change Kills Children.”
The world’s most influential green journalist, Bill McKibben, called climate change the “greatest challenge humans have ever faced” and said it would “wipe out civilizations.”
Mainstream journalists reported, repeatedly, that the Amazon was “the lungs of the world,” and that deforestation was like a nuclear bomb going off.
As a result, half of the people surveyed around the world last year said they thought climate change would make humanity extinct. And in January, one out of five British children told pollsters they were having nightmares about climate change.
Whether or not you have children you must see how wrong this is. I admit I may be sensitive because I have a teenage daughter. After we talked about the science she was reassured. But her friends are deeply misinformed and thus, understandably, frightened.
I thus decided I had to speak out. I knew that writing a few articles wouldn’t be enough. I needed a book to properly lay out all of the evidence.
And so my formal apology for our fear-mongering comes in the form of my new book, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All.
It is based on two decades of research and three decades of environmental activism. At 400 pages, with 100 of them endnotes, Apocalypse Never covers climate change, deforestation, plastic waste, species extinction, industrialization, meat, nuclear energy, and renewables.
Some highlights from the book:
Factories and modern farming are the keys to human liberation and environmental progress
The most important thing for saving the environment is producing more food, particularly meat, on less land
The most important thing for reducing air pollution and carbon emissions is moving from wood to coal to petroleum to natural gas to uranium
100% renewables would require increasing the land used for energy from today’s 0.5% to 50%
We should want cities, farms, and power plants to have higher, not lower, power densities
Vegetarianism reduces one’s emissions by less than 4%
Greenpeace didn’t save the whales, switching from whale oil to petroleum and palm oil did
“Free-range” beef would require 20 times more land and produce 300% more emissions
Greenpeace dogmatism worsened forest fragmentation of the Amazon
The colonialist approach to gorilla conservation in the Congo produced a backlash that may have resulted in the killing of 250 elephants
Why were we all so misled?
In the final three chapters of Apocalypse Never I expose the financial, political, and ideological motivations. Environmental groups have accepted hundreds of millions of dollars from fossil fuel interests. Groups motivated by anti-humanist beliefs forced the World Bank to stop trying to end poverty and instead make poverty “sustainable.” And status anxiety, depression, and hostility to modern civilization are behind much of the alarmism
Once you realize just how badly misinformed we have been, often by people with plainly unsavory or unhealthy motivations, it is hard not to feel duped.
Will Apocalypse Never make any difference? There are certainly reasons to doubt it.
The news media have been making apocalyptic pronouncements about climate change since the late 1980s, and do not seem disposed to stop.
The ideology behind environmental alarmsim — Malthusianism — has been repeatedly debunked for 200 years and yet is more powerful than ever.
But there are also reasons to believe that environmental alarmism will, if not come to an end, have diminishing cultural power.
The coronavirus pandemic is an actual crisis that puts the climate “crisis” into perspective. Even if you think we have overreacted, Covid-19 has killed nearly 500,000 people and shattered economies around the globe.
Scientific institutions including WHO and IPCC have undermined their credibility through the repeated politicization of science. Their future existence and relevance depends on new leadership and serious reform.
Facts still matter, and social media is allowing for a wider range of new and independent voices to outcompete alarmist environmental journalists at legacy publications.
Nations are reverting openly to self-interest and away from Malthusianism and neoliberalism, which is good for nuclear and bad for renewables.
The evidence is overwhelming that our high-energy civilization is better for people and nature than the low-energy civilization that climate alarmists would return us to.
The invitations from IPCC and Congress are signs of a growing openness to new thinking about climate change and the environment. Another one has been to the response to my book from climate scientists, conservationists, and environmental scholars. "Apocalypse Never is an extremely important book,” writes Richard Rhodes, the Pulitzer-winning author of The Making of the Atomic Bomb. “This may be the most important book on the environment ever written,” says one of the fathers of modern climate science Tom Wigley.
“We environmentalists condemn those with antithetical views of being ignorant of science and susceptible to confirmation bias,” wrote the former head of The Nature Conservancy, Steve McCormick. “But too often we are guilty of the same. Shellenberger offers ‘tough love:’ a challenge to entrenched orthodoxies and rigid, self-defeating mindsets. Apocalypse Never serves up occasionally stinging, but always well-crafted, evidence-based points of view that will help develop the ‘mental muscle’ we need to envision and design not only a hopeful, but an attainable, future.”
That is all I hoped for in writing it. If you’ve made it this far, I hope you’ll agree that it’s perhaps not as strange as it seems that a lifelong environmentalist, progressive, and climate activist felt the need to speak out against the alarmism.
I further hope that you’ll accept my apology.
- -2 votes before ability to even read content... suspect...deathboy
- posted for 30s? i truly hope ppl can see the manipulationsdeathboy
- you can't have had to look for long - just about every right-wing publication with an agenda published this without qualification, even though it's just a listFax_Benson
- of non-sequiturs.Fax_Benson
- He's back on the sauce.utopian
- But isn't that no different than any alarmist climate change report? It's like thank you for not smokingdeathboy
- You sucked his cock on o side but now he's working for the other. However now imho is on the side of sciencedeathboy
- And make be I'm more familiar with his nonsequitors but they are correct. Call it as u will. Find a source that isn't non sequitors as opposingdeathboy
- Or so get into the real data of climate change graphs and understand it's average system is so so cavemandeathboy
- And again still 2 downvotes in 30s... If I was software is flag it.deathboy
- It's a puff piece. Just from a turncoat showing it's true shallowness. He just now can be less alarmist with science on his side he used to work arounddeathboy
- And fax I test you to find what's wrong in any of the statements. When u can explain why u believe it's make for better peopledeathboy
- None of them are substantiated. Some are clearly factual but have little to do with the wider argument. They're all made by him - not a scientist.Fax_Benson
- but hes a proven expert who has helped push a ton of policy. What is substaniated, and strange thing to say before other are clearly factual. What arguement?deathboy
- see why its hard to take a non "scientist" opinion to judge a proven "expert" in fields they know nothing about when they cant state a single discrepancy fordeathboy
- argument mistake and provide reason as to why for "bigger" argument. it tells me you have no idea what your are talking about.deathboy
- except its not the narrative you choose to believe. mic dropdeathboy
- LOL. Industrialized nations have not reduced their carbon emissions, they outsourced them to less industrialized countries.zarkonite
- says a non expert. im tolf im a non expert so i can tell everyone who isnt one as well they are stupid vs expertsdeathboy
- of course only an expert would know that China has this giant industrial base that sells to the world, and no one's ever written about that either.zarkonite
- Well china producing most manufacturing can be controlled and ruled through global climate policies.deathboy
- Which is a huge end game of the policiesdeathboy
- Nairn1
Adding powdered rock to farmland can improve soil quality and - BONUS! - draw down comparably huge amounts of CO2 through natural weathering processes.
Bonzer.
- Ok, now let's calculate the amount of carbon needed to make the powedered rocks and see if the budget adds up.zarkonite
- We already know a big part of the problem can be solved just by planting trees, but will governments actually do any of this?yuekit
- Apparently we already have rock dust as a largely unused waste-product and it can be used it some areas to promote tree growth.
Win win win!Nairn - I view these sort of developments as mid-measures that alongside genuine improvements can buy time for our descendents.Nairn
- utopian1
NOAA taps David Legates, professor who questions the seriousness and severity of global warming, for top role
A longtime climate change skeptic has been appointed by the Trump administration to help run the federal agency charged with producing "much of the climate research funded" by the government, The Washington Post reported Sunday.
- PhanLo2
- https://mashable.com…PhanLo
- https://grist.org/en…PhanLo
- Make no mistake. BP stays in business because their customers are insatiable.imbecile
- It makes sense.PhanLo
- Love the ‘scare’ quotesGnash
- Totally. It's not just BP either; they're all huge pieces of shit.MondoMorphic
- omahadesigns0
- Patagonia? Respecccgrafician
- Yes.omahadesigns
- ha appeal to all. smartdeathboy
- utopian1
- At what cost especially for the poor. Ie evs in price points of luxury vehicles. Hell dodge viper price pointsdeathboy
- Or perhaps human will adapt to climate change as they always have. And ignore such ideas they can control itdeathboy
- I take it that you are climate denier.utopian
- I believe climate changes. And I believe the humans ability to stop it is a jokedeathboy
- I also believe the interests peddling idea we can stop climate change are much more corporate and rich interests than u understand.deathboy
- It's not something for normal ppl. Ask the lower 30% adaptations they make everyday and u will see climate change is not an issuedeathboy
- You are selling elon musk's metaphorical dick u hatedeathboy
- Should ask your handler about the hypocrisydeathboy
- That covid is really getting to head.utopian
- perhaps, but u dont have a goal for climate change prop. just fear. which says your motivesdeathboy
- utopian1
The Great Barrier Reef has lost half its corals within 3 decades
Australia's Great Barrier Reef has lost 50% of its coral populations in the last three decades, with climate change a key driver of reef disturbance, a new study has found.
- how was the reef 1000k to 10k years ago?deathboy
- when talking climate and time we are talking so much longer than normal human life spandeathboy
- You are clearly a Coviodiot. Stop posting patient zero.utopian
- just want context of the reefs existence. seems pretty scientific in forming an opinion right?deathboy
- how much can u make. like 7 bucks an hour in the ukraine?deathboy
- naw u have 0 idea of ukrainedeathboy
- deathboy isn't it exhausting being a know-it-all contrarian on every fucking topic?inteliboy
- not really. is it exhausting being contrarian to a know it all?deathboy
- utopian2
Scientific Consensus: Earth's Climate is Warming: Facts
Multiple studies published in peer-reviewed scientific journals show that 97 percent or more of actively publishing climate scientists agree.
- well we are in a 40-100k warming cycle that has existed regardless of humans...deathboy
- would one expect no warming?deathboy
- Whether it's man made or occuring naturally it's happening Deathboy. Large groups of people are already moving because of it.PhanLo
- How's your little island house you were building Deathy?PhanLo
- uh yea who says climate change isnt happening? the ppl who are suspect are the ones who say they can stop climate changedeathboy
- my house is fine. should be good until long after im deaddeathboy
- and honestly. ppl who promise they can stop climate change. 1. its obvious laugh. 2. if possible would it be good. Stop a change of seasons for summer all yeardeathboy
- how would that play out. there is natural rhythms with environment. and they are much like free market capitalism. self correcting and balancing.deathboy
- but u get people trying to engineer, same as they do in markets with laws and rules and u can expect more harm. thank god our no tech yetdeathboy
- Coupled with the death of the oceans, climate change could end our civilisation. There's a few other things we could throw in too.PhanLo
- Death of our oceans... Can u explain that one? Over fishing? Dumping? But climate change can well change alit look at mayansdeathboy
- Hell geological proof in the empty quarter it was once lush. Humans have changed and adapted. As we will regardless of false prophets and economic sacrifices todeathboy
- Stop climate change. Hell one big event like a yellowstone explosion could drastically change everything. Might be scary but our control is actually very littledeathboy
- Let's be honest. Isn't current political climate shit much like tribe leaders recruiting witch doctors for crops and to make weather behave. It's not newdeathboy
- Hell a popular witch doctor is a kid who strangely never visits china...deathboy
- Hard to take it serious when u have seen the same dog and pony show spanned over milleniumsdeathboy
- Can't explain it?deathboy
- deathboy-5
great article on phony censorship
https://reason.com/2020/10/07/ph…
