Climate Change / Global Warming Discussion

[tigerade]

Exxon: Highly unlikely world limits fossil fuels - Yahoo Finance

NEW YORK (AP) -- On the same day the world's climate scientists issued their latest report on climate change and the risks it poses to society, the nation's biggest oil and gas company said the world's climate policies are "highly unlikely" to stop it from selling fossil fuels far into the future.

"We know enough based on the research and science that the risk (of climate change) is real and appropriate steps should be taken to address that risk," Ken Cohen, Exxon's government affairs chief, said in an interview Monday. "But given the essential role that energy plays in everyone's lives, those steps need to be taken in context with other realities we face, including lifting much of the world's population out of poverty."

My personal take: I don't think Exxon is wrong at all. I am pessimistic that the world will make any real limits on carbon pollution anytime soon.

 

[hcsharp]

... the nation's biggest oil and gas company said the world's climate policies are "highly unlikely" to stop it from selling fossil fuels far into the future.

Translation: "We have the money to buy out enough policy makers and spew out propaganda to make sure we can keep selling fossil fuels far into the future."

 

[Raffy.Roma]

My personal take: I don't think Exxon is wrong at all. I am pessimistic that the world will make any real limits on carbon pollution anytime soon.

Agree. That's why IMO geoengineering is absolutely needed to remove CO2 from the atmosphere.

 

[RichardC]

Exxon: Highly unlikely world limits fossil fuels - Yahoo Finance
My personal take: I don't think Exxon is wrong at all. I am pessimistic that the world will make any real limits on carbon pollution anytime soon.

Until a year ago I would have been 100% on the same page, but I now believe that the momentum and compelling economics of renewables and other green technologies (in particular, wind, solar, electric transport and heat pumps) are shortly going to make the inaction of our corrupted policy makers less and less relevant. The distributed energy revolution is happening in real time, and like the Internet, its growth has achieved such a scale that it will be very hard to shut it down. There is too much evidence that we are near, or at, the tipping point, where the increasing economic costs of oil and gas, and the increasingly unacceptable environmental costs of coal, on the one hand, and the decreasing prices and increasing penetration of renewable and green alternatives, result in a rapid transition. The falling productivity of "investments" in oil and gas, as discussed in:

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/the-take/the-energy-transition-tipping-point-is-here/

and the increasing competitiveness of solar, as discussed in:

http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Report-Off-Grid-May-Soon-Reach-Tipping-Point.html

point the way to the transition, and to the growing influence of renewables. The following article pulls the threads together:

http://www.bcsea.org/sites/bcsea.org/files/civicrm/persist/contribute/files/clean_energy_economy.pdf

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Until a year ago I would have been 100% on the same page, but I now believe that the momentum and compelling economics of renewables and other green technologies (in particular, wind, solar, electric transport and heat pumps) are shortly going to make the inaction of our corrupted policy makers less and less relevant. The distributed energy revolution is happening in real time, and like the Internet, its growth has achieved such a scale that it will be very hard to shut it down. There is too much evidence that we are near, or at, the tipping point, where the increasing economic costs of oil and gas, and the increasingly unacceptable environmental costs of coal, on the one hand, and the decreasing prices and increasing penetration of renewable and green alternatives, result in a rapid transition. The falling productivity of "investments" in oil and gas, as discussed in:

http://www.smartplanet.com/blog/the-take/the-energy-transition-tipping-point-is-here/

and the increasing competitiveness of solar, as discussed in:

http://oilprice.com/Latest-Energy-News/World-News/Report-Off-Grid-May-Soon-Reach-Tipping-Point.html

point the way to the transition, and to the growing influence of renewables. The following article pulls the threads together:

http://www.bcsea.org/sites/bcsea.org/files/civicrm/persist/contribute/files/clean_energy_economy.pdf

Really hope that you are right Richard.

 

[JRP3]

What do others make of this?

Frankly I'm encouraged that 56% of people think it's a problem.

 

[tigerade]

Time for the obligatory news article that makes Tigerade mad for today:
Science and Oil Dont Mix: Wyoming Becomes First State to Reject New U.S. Science Standards for Schools - Yahoo News

I knew it, just knew it. When I heard about the new science standards, I was enthusiastic about them. We should be teaching kids how science works, getting them to understand the process, not just ramming facts down their throat. It is a wonderful approach. However, the new science standards commit the cardinal sin of teaching climate change to students. So here comes the fight.

 

[Raffy.Roma]

Time for the obligatory news article that makes Tigerade mad for today:
Science and Oil Dont Mix: Wyoming Becomes First State to Reject New U.S. Science Standards for Schools - Yahoo News

IMO thanks to the crystal clear system existing in the USA sooner or later in Wyoming they will understand that they made a wrong decision. It's just a matter of time.

 

[ggies07]

"But given the essential role that energy plays in everyone's lives, those steps need to be taken in context with other realities we face, including lifting much of the world's population out of poverty."

Holy Sh*T!! Whaaaaat!?! Riiiiight, so all the drilling for oil is for those nations of poverty. hahaha. There are companies out there that are using solar to get electricity to poor populations. I want to slap them so hard. This sucks. My granddad used to work for Mobile and now his old company actually came out and said this......man........really can't talk about it with him now. hahaha.

 

[RichardC]

ExxonMobil on "Energy and Climate"

The report issued by ExxonMobil on "Energy and Climate" included a mix of content with which I agree (and much more with which I do not agree). Content in the former category included a recognition of the necessity and desirability of putting a price on GHG emissions, and some sensible principles that should apply to the implementation of such a price.

See: http://corporate.exxonmobil.com/en/...naging-climate-change-risks/carbon-asset-risk
http://cdn.exxonmobil.com/~/media/Files/Other/2014/Report - Energy and Climate.pdf

See also: http://www.reuters.com/article/2014/03/31/exxon-carbon-risk-idUSnPn70ZcDH+8b+PRN20140331

At page 11 the report states as follows (my emphasis added):

The risks of climate change are serious enough to warrant cost-effective policy responses that balance mitigation, adaptation, and other social priorities. Good long-term climate change mitigation policy should adhere to the following principles:

•  Promote GHG mitigation policies that are cost effective, economically efficient and science based
•  Ensure a uniform and predictable cost of GHG emissions across the economy
•  Let market prices drive the selection of solutions
•  Promote global participation while recognizing the priorities of the developing world
•  Limit consequences of differing national policies on competitiveness
•  Minimize complexity, and maximize transparency to consumers and companies

The fee and dividend model proposed by Dr. James Hansen and the Citizens Climate Lobby, and the pollution levy and rebate model that I had detailed in the Carbon Tax thread, see: http://www.teslamotorsclub.com/showthread.php/28339-Carbon-Tax/page5?p=607172#post607172 would generally satisfy these criteria (although the timing and magnitude of the charges will doubtless be controversial). In my view it is helpful to see the degree of agreement and convergence as to the existence of the climate change problem, and the need to put a price on carbon in order to most intelligently and effectively address this problem

Other thoughts?

 

[RichardC]

Great editorial in the New York Times today

Great editorial in the New York Times today. See:

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/opinion/bittman-the-aliens-have-landed.html?ref=todayspaper&_r=0

In the concluding paragraph Mark Bittman states:

As individuals, we must do what we can to encourage and demand those efforts, while also reducing our own cumulatively enormous carbon footprints. Americans have long led the world in consumption; we created the lifestyle that’s cooking the planet. If we demonstrate a willingness to change — rather than whining “but what about the Chinese?” — others will follow.

A sentiment which is more than equally applicable to Canada and Canadians!

 

[SwedishAdvocate]

Part 1:

Part 2:

WEDNESDAY, APRIL 2, 2014

/.../

U.N. Climate Panel Issues Dire Warning of Threat to Global Food Supply, Calls for Action & Adaption

/.../

The United Nations Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change has issued its most dire warning yet about how greenhouse gases have driven up global temperatures and extreme weather, while threatening sources of food and water. "Throughout the 21st century, climate-change impacts are projected to slow down economic growth, make poverty reduction more difficult, further erode food security, and prolong existing and create new poverty traps, the latter particularly in urban areas and emerging hot spots of hunger," the report says.


Source: U.N. Climate Panel Issues Dire Warning of Threat to Global Food Supply, Calls for Action Adaption | Democracy Now!

And as always: Everything on Democracy Now! is available for free in virtually all kinds of media-formats.


- - - Updated - - -

House Votes to Block Climate Research

The Republican-controlled House has approved a measure that would effectively force government agencies to stop studying climate change. The measure calls on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and related bodies to focus on forecasting severe weather — but not explore one of its likely causes. The vote comes as the U.N.'s top climate panel issued a report this week calling on governments to prepare for global warming's worsening impact and to cut emissions in order to prevent it from getting worse.


Source: Headlines for April 02, 2014 | Democracy Now!

The obligatory three characters and some explanation...
- - - Updated - - -

Koch-Backed Measure Bans Transit Funding in Tennessee

The Tennessee Senate has approved a measure that would ban new mass transit projects across the state. The bill was introduced to undermine a proposed rapid bus system in Nashville called the Amp, but would apply statewide. According to the website Think Progress, the measure received critical backing from the billionaire Republican donors Charles and David Koch. The Koch brothers’ Americans for Prosperity pushed lawmakers to vote for the bill and may have even sparked its introduction.


Source: Headlines for April 02, 2014 | Democracy Now!

Some more obligatory 3 characters and some explanatory text...

 

[tigerade]

Finally, Conservative news sites and blogs have read the latest climate report, said that they will start embracing science, and put aside childish denial tactics.

Nah, just kidding:
Climate Fails: The Internets New Climate Report | ThinkProgress

 

[JRP3]

Ha, the only April Fools joke that got me, a day late :biggrin:

 

[tigerade]

Wow, the House of Representatives passed a bill directing NOAA to do less study on climate change.
House Passes Bill Requiring Agencies To Put Climate Change On The Back Burner | ThinkProgress

Of course this will never pass the Senate and definitely won't be signed by Obama, but it makes me scared of what will happen if the Republicans take the Senate and White House over the next few years. We could have the anti-science movement controlling all 3 branches of the Federal Government (the Supreme Court leans conservative right now). I am fearing that it could be worse than what happened during the Bush administration.

Climate change policy of the United States - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

[JRP3]

The conscious decision to be the anti-science party is disturbing.

 

[wmarcy]

What will you do, when the consensus is proved a lie?

 

[SwedishAdvocate]

What will you do, when the consensus is proved a lie?

How can it be proven to be a lie? Where is the scientific evidence against a consensus?

 

[Raffy.Roma]

What will you do, when the consensus is proved a lie?

Please report data and scientific arguments supporting your thesis. This thread has always kept a high technical and scientific level. We want the thread to keep such a high technical and scientific level.

[to moderator: feel free to remove from this thread posts reporting thesis that are not supported by any data and scientific arguments]

 

[tigerade]

What will you do, when the consensus is proved a lie?

Lol, what does this question even mean? You realize that a lot of us read scientific publications right? Every peer-reviewed paper in a scientific journal on climate change/global warming that I've read has supported AGW, and those papers have cited other articles that also support AGW. At some point, you can do the math. And really that's because there just isn't much about the core theory to dispute. As outlined by RichardC's presentation, the physics and chemistry behind are not ambiguous.

Mods: Apologizing ahead of time if I'm feeding a troll here. The question seems trollish, but if he has a real argument with a real position he's willing to outline, I'd like to hear it.