Page 307 of 312 FirstFirst ... 207257297305306307308309 ... LastLast
Results 4,591 to 4,605 of 4674
  1. #4591
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,413
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    I forgot to call out Lomborg's trademark cherry-picking. He highlights the worst-case scenarios, with no mention of the best alternatives. The shopping bag kindest to the environment when factoring in life-cycle effects (after PET bags) is the ubiquitous green bag, as long as it's used more than 23 times, according to Peter Allan, Principal Consultant at Hyder Consulting and author of numerous studies for the government on the impact of plastic bags, including reports advising which system would be kindest to the environment:

    Overall, a reusable bag is a better option for the environment than bags with between one and three typical uses. "Given the popularity of the green bags, we needed to test whether reusable was better for the environment and this was comprehensively proven – but only so long as you use it repeatedly over a long period," says Allan.
    A green bag has to be used more than 23 times before it becomes a better option than single-use bags.
    Of the range of reusable bag types tested, the most environmentally-friendly option was the 100% recycled content PET reusable bag, closely followed by the reusable green bag.
    Calico bags aren't recommended, because of the amount of water used to make them.

    https://www.choice.com.au/shopping/e...-shopping-bags
    But PET is a type of plastic too.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  2. #4592
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,413
    Quote Originally Posted by Blunderbuss View Post
    Brendan O’Neill is just an Internet troll who’s views on any subject can be safely ignored: https://twitter.com/GeorgeMonbiot/st...64399083859970

    Attachment 3859

    Unable to deal with her potent arguments, people are resorting to lazy, personal attacks.
    Big deal. Hitler changed the course of history too. But keep listening to a child if you want to.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  3. #4593
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    No he's not. He thinks AGW is real and a problem. He just thinks that the usual government-proposed solutions are misguided, and he proposed ideas that will help far more people while costing far less.
    Actually, he mis-represents the extent of the problem. Cites studies and mis-represents them. See here. Classic denialist.

    The opposite of consensus.
    meep meep

  4. #4594
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Kevin Bonham View Post
    23 uses seems ambitious. I normally use reusable bags available from supermarkets here for around 15 cents. But from time to time a convenient opportunity to shop at a supermarket comes up unexpectedly and I will have to buy more such bags. As a result I have a stockpile of about 20 of the things. I doubt that on average I would end up using them 23 times each.
    Those 15c bags are recycled PET - eight uses equal the climate change impact of the old single-use bag, but 84 uses necessary to have same cumulative environmental impact (water use, energy use, etc.).
    The 99c green bag is woven polypropylene at five and 45 uses respectively, based on the Danish study cited by Lomborg. Woolies will give you a free replacement when they wear out.

    I've got a dozen or so green bags round the place, which we use for carrying all sorts of stuff around, as well as shopping. We wear them out with long use.

  5. #4595
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,968
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    But PET is a type of plastic too.
    Of course, but recycled plastic.

  6. #4596
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,715
    Quote Originally Posted by Ian Murray View Post
    Those 15c bags are recycled PET - eight uses equal the climate change impact of the old single-use bag, but 84 uses necessary to have same cumulative environmental impact (water use, energy use, etc.).
    Those are pretty tough, and based on my experience they'll last a lot longer than that. I just wish the supermarkets made it easier to use 'proper' bags (backpacks, etc).

  7. #4597
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,596
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Big deal. Hitler changed the course of history too. But keep listening to a child if you want to.
    Probably better than listening to Brendan O'Neill. Pretty much all of his output I've seen boils down to the idea that his contrarian trolling is special because he claims to be an atheist.

  8. #4598

  9. #4599
    CC Grandmaster
    Join Date
    Apr 2008
    Posts
    4,715
    Quote Originally Posted by Patrick Byrom View Post
    Waiting for the penalty hearing, still several weeks away:
    James Cook U has kept its prow down since Judge Vasta found it wrongly sacked scientist Peter Ridd (CMM April 19). The university dismissed him for what it said was breaching its code of conduct in commenting on research at JCU. However, the judge found Dr Ridd’s comments were covered by clause 14 of the university’s enterprise agreement, which deals with academic freedom. There is no word on whether the university will appeal. But as to Dr Ridd returning to work (the university insists he is not a professor of the university because it does not presently employ him), this appears to depend on a court hearing on penalty, said to be on in July.
    So Vasta has been stood down. And JCU will appeal his decision. Although Ridd will not be reinstated:

    On Monday The Australian Financial Review revealed Judge Vasta had been stood down from administrative roles by the Chief Judge of the Federal Circuit Court, Will Alstergren, and was "receiving mentoring" to assist him to "fulfil his duties". Under Federal Court process, judges continue working on existing cases even when relieved of other duties or being counselled. That followed a recent appeal against a conviction in another case in which the Full Federal Court of the Family Court called Judge Vasta's conduct of the case "an affront to justice". ...

    On Friday the university announced it would appeal any orders to be made by Judge Vasta in August. Dr Ridd told supporters on a crowd-funding website he was no longer seeking reinstatement because the actions of the university indicated "if I went back, I would have a very troubled existence that would also threaten all my colleagues in the Physics Department".

  10. #4600
    CC Grandmaster Capablanca-Fan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    Atlanta, GA (formerly Brisbane, and before that Wellington, NZ)
    Posts
    19,413
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    Actually, he mis-represents the extent of the problem. Cites studies and mis-represents them. See here. Classic denialist.
    Even your article calls him a ‘lukewarmer’ just because he refuses to accept the leftist big-government policies ostensibly to combat warming that he agrees is happening.

    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    The opposite of consensus.
    Consensus is not science but politics.
    “The destructive capacity of the individual, however vicious, is small; of the state, however well-intentioned, almost limitless. Expand the state and that destructive capacity necessarily expands, too, pari passu.”—Paul Johnson, Modern Times, 1983.

  11. #4601
    Monster of the deep Kevin Bonham's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    37,596
    Posts moved

    Moved posts about comparing Trump to Hitler to US politics thread.

  12. #4602
    CC Grandmaster road runner's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2006
    Location
    on the skin of the pale blue dot
    Posts
    12,417
    Quote Originally Posted by Capablanca-Fan View Post
    Even your article calls him a ‘lukewarmer’ just because he refuses to accept the leftist big-government policies ostensibly to combat warming that he agrees is happening.


    Consensus is not science but politics.
    Consensus is the term inappropriately used in Lomberg's company name, and is the opposite of what he's aiming for in the company. He's representing the view of vast minority, sometimes estimated at about 3% of people railing against climate change action.

    His beef is not just with solutions - whether they should come from governement or not - but with the degree of the problem. Different things.
    meep meep

  13. #4603
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,968
    Quote Originally Posted by road runner View Post
    Consensus is the term inappropriately used in Lomberg's company name, and is the opposite of what he's aiming for in the company. He's representing the view of vast minority, sometimes estimated at about 3% of people railing against climate change action.

    His beef is not just with solutions - whether they should come from governement or not - but with the degree of the problem. Different things.
    Since the Danish government pulled the plug on funding, his "Consensus Center" operates from a post-box in Massachusetts. An attempt by Tony Abbott to fund it through an Australian university was thwarted by academia.

    His proposed solutions to climate change are mitigation (sea walls etc) and geo-engineering (physically cooling the planet by e.g. blanketing the atmosphere with aerosols). The knock-on effects of geo-engineering, e.g. changing rainfall patterns, are unknown but carry substantial risks.

  14. #4604
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,968
    CEO of The Big Australian throws his weight behind massive climate action

    BHP boss announces $US400m plan to combat 'indisputable' climate crisis
    The Guardian
    23.7.19

    The chief executive of the world’s largest mining company has endorsed drastic action to combat global warming, which he calls “indisputable”, and an emerging crisis.

    “The planet will survive. Many species may not,” the BHP chief executive officer, Andrew Mackenzie, told a business breakfast in London on Tuesday. “This is a confronting conclusion but as a veteran geologist once said, ‘you can’t argue with a rock’.”

    Mackenzie endorsed carbon pricing but said it was not enough to combat the looming threat of mass extinctions and major sea rises.
    BHP reveals five mine dams at 'extreme' risk of causing damage and loss of life
    Read more

    He announced BHP was spending $US400m ($A570m) to create a climate investment program to reduce emissions from its own operations as well as those generated from its resources.

    BHP has been working to reduce its emissions since the 1990s but still directly produced 16.5m tonnes of carbon dioxide-equivalent emissions in the 2017/18 fiscal year, mostly from energy and diesel use at its operations...

    But when one adds to the equation customers’ use of BHP’s products – most notably the processing of iron ore and the burning of coal and crude oil – BHP’s indirect emissions dwarfed that, totalling 596.4m tonnes of carbon dioxide for the fiscal year.

    That’s equivalent of the emissions produced in a year by 126m cars or 153 coal-fired power plants, according to the EPA calculator.

    “Use of emissions-intensive products from the resource industry have contributed significantly to global warming,” Mackenzie said, while noting that BHP’s emissions in 2017 were less than those in 2006.

    BHP has a short-term goal to cap 2022 emissions at 2017 levels, and a long-term goal of achieving net-zero emissions by mid-century....

    It is also strengthening the link between emissions performance and executive renumeration from 2021, and has invested $6m in Carbon Engineering Limited, a Canadian company focused on developing ways to capture carbon dioxide from the atmosphere.

    Mackenzie said that “like most scientists” he believes that global warming will tend to the upper end of forecasts, while conceding there was a chance it would not. But he said prudent risk management meant BHP was planning to protect against the downside.

    Global warming required a “coordinated global response” and no single solution could combat it, Mackenzie said . “While we endorse a carbon price this is not enough in isolation.”

    Electric vehicles, renewables, reforestation and replacing single-use plastics all have trade-offs, such as simply moving fossil fuel emissions up the chain if energy production is not also decarbonised.

    “An ‘all of the above’ solution barely gets us there,” Mackenzie said. “All emitters, resource companies, customers, consumers must play their part together with governments to meet the climate challenge.”

  15. #4605
    CC Grandmaster Ian Murray's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Posts
    4,968
    The terrible truth of climate change
    Joëlle Gergis
    The Monthly
    August 2019

    ...One common metric used to investigate the effects of global warming is known as “equilibrium climate sensitivity”, defined as the full amount of global surface warming that will eventually occur in response to a doubling of atmospheric CO2 concentrations compared to pre-industrial times. It’s sometimes referred to as the holy grail of climate science because it helps quantify the specific risks posed to human society as the planet continues to warm.

    We know that CO2 concentrations have risen from pre-industrial levels of 280 parts per million (ppm) to approximately 410 ppm today, the highest recorded in at least three million years. Without major mitigation efforts, we are likely to reach 560 ppm by around 2060.

    When the IPCC’s fifth assessment report was published in 2013, it estimated that such a doubling of CO2 was likely to produce warming within the range of 1.5 to 4.5°C as the Earth reaches a new equilibrium. However, preliminary estimates calculated from the latest global climate models (being used in the current IPCC assessment, due out in 2021) are far higher than with the previous generation of models. Early reports are predicting that a doubling of CO2 may in fact produce between 2.8 and 5.8°C of warming. Incredibly, at least eight of the latest models produced by leading research centres in the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada and France are showing climate sensitivity of 5°C or warmer...

    Even with the 1°C of warming we’ve already experienced, 50 per cent of the Great Barrier Reef is dead. We are witnessing catastrophic ecosystem collapse of the largest living organism on the planet. As I share this horrifying information with audiences around the country, I often pause to allow people to try and really take that information in....

    Although the very foundation of human civilisation is at stake, the world is on track to seriously overshoot our UN targets. Worse still, global carbon emissions are still rising. In response, scientists are prioritising research on how the planet has responded during other warm periods in the Earth’s history.

    The most comprehensive summary of conditions experienced during past warm periods in the Earth’s recent history was published in June 2018 in one of our leading journals, Nature Geoscience, by 59 leading experts from 17 countries. The report concluded that warming of between 1.5 and 2°C in the past was enough to see significant shifts in climate zones, and land and aquatic ecosystems “spatially reorganize”.

    These changes triggered substantial long-term melting of ice in Greenland and Antarctica, unleashing 6 to 13 metres of global sea-level rise lasting thousands of years.

    Examining the Earth’s climatic past tells us that even between 1.5 and 2°C of warming sees the world reconfigure in ways that people don’t yet appreciate. All bets are off between 3 and 4°C, where we are currently headed. Parts of Australia will become uninhabitable, as other areas of our country become increasingly ravaged by extreme weather events....

    Without major action, we will see tropical cyclones drifting into areas on the southern edge of current cyclone zones, into places such as south-east Queensland and northern New South Wales, where infrastructure is not ready to cope with cyclonic conditions.

    These areas currently house more than 3.6 million people; we simply aren’t prepared for what is upon us.

    There is a very rational reason why Australian schoolkids are now taking to the streets – the immensity of what is at stake is truly staggering. Staying silent about this planetary emergency no longer feels like an option for me either. Given how disconnected policy is from scientific reality in this country, an urgent and pragmatic national conversation is now essential. Other-wise, living on a destabilised planet is the terrible truth that we will all face....

    We still have time to try and avert the scale of the disaster, but we must respond as we would in an emergency. The question is, can we muster the best of our humanity in time?

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 3 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 3 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Evangelism and Climate Change
    By Ian Murray in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 14
    Last Post: 11-04-2017, 11:24 AM
  2. Climate Change (read bottom up)
    By antichrist in forum Politics
    Replies: 29
    Last Post: 11-10-2010, 01:00 PM
  3. Climate Change Is Irreversable ??
    By Bruce Oates in forum Religion and Science
    Replies: 5
    Last Post: 28-01-2009, 09:55 PM
  4. The Death of Climate Change Consensus
    By Spiny Norman in forum Politics
    Replies: 1
    Last Post: 21-12-2007, 11:38 AM
  5. Pentagon Report on Climate Change
    By Cat in forum Non-Chess
    Replies: 8
    Last Post: 21-06-2004, 10:50 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •