Species wide suicide

Cobalt_Kid
#1
I've been doing a great deal of reading in the last six months on Global Warming, climate change and the extensive campaign by industry to dely and block change as long as possible.

Some things to keep in mind:

-Companies like ExxonMobil, Southern Company and associations like Western Fuels, American Pertroleum Institute, and Peabody Energy have spent over a billion dollars in the last dozen years to confuse the science as much as possible and influence lawmakers into doing nothing in North America.

-According to some experienced climatologists like James Hansen the director of NASA's Goddard Institute of Space Studies in New York, there's a very real risk of a runaway greenhouse effect if we consume all coal, oil and natural gas reserves. It becomes a "dead certainty" if we convert and burn the tar sands and oil shales. A runaway greenhouse would exterminate all surface life on the planet btw.

- There's over 1,400 coal fired power plants being planned for construction in the next 20 years worldwide.

Some great books on the subject are:

The Weather Makers, by Tim Flannery
Storm of my Grandchildren, by James Hansen
Hell and High Water, by Alastair McIntosh
Climate Cover-Up, by James Hoggan
Boiling Point, by Ross Gelbspan
Censoring Science, by Mark Bowen
 
taxslave
Avatar
#2
Would you rather we immediately destroyed our economy and way of life on the off chance it would stop global warming? The cities would be the first to go with no more transporting of food to them and no heat or cooking facilities even if there was a bit of food. No water or sewer either.
I'm not advocating free spewing of pollution but it is not that simple to change a system that has evolved over many years just because s couple of gloom and doomers say so. These people? have cried wolf and lied a few too many times causing many unnecessary disruptions to peoples lives.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#3
Right...because those are the only options. Business as usual or complete elimination of all industry...
 
Kakato
#4
China is the one building dirty coal fired power plants every day.
 
taxslave
Avatar
#5
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Right...because those are the only options. Business as usual or complete elimination of all industry...

No these are not the only options but Suzuki and others of his ilk are always pushing for the end to industry. Business as usual in reality means continually upgrading pollution abatement equipment and attempting to follow ever more stringent rules, all of which is expensive and time consuming. Those that are not employed in the resource industries do not have a good grasp of what we put up with from various government agencies on a daily basis. I am employed in cleaning up logging debris so it is not burned and you would not believe the hurdles that various bureaucrats put in front of us to make even that unworkable. What is worse is when different ministries that think they have a say in our jobs give us conflicting rules. Makes you want to go postal when all we really want is to do a good job and go home safe with a good paycheque.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#6
Quote: Originally Posted by KakatoView Post

China is the one building dirty coal fired power plants every day.

And they also lead the world in renewable energy deployment, $34.6 billion in 2009 compared to the US who spent $18.6 Billion in 2009. The top three in five year investment growth of renewable energy are China, Brazil, and Turkey.

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

No these are not the only options but Suzuki and others of his ilk are always pushing for the end to industry.

Did the original poster mention David Suzuki? I've read the first book on the list, Tom Flannery's. It's a very good read, and does not push for an end to industry.

In fact, that's a huge lie. Nobody, including David Suzuki are pushing for an end to industry. They push for newer technology.

Nice repetition of lies though...
 
Kakato
Avatar
#7
Is David Suzuki still being chauferred around to his conferences in that huge black limo?
 
taxslave
Avatar
-1
#8
Nice repetition of lies though...

Yes that is mostly what the greenies do. A lie is as good as the truth if it gets donations from the gullible.
 
Kakato
Avatar
#9
Newsflash,the climate will change,just as it has for millions of years,there will also be another ice age which will be followed by tropical climes and then another ice age.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#10
Quote: Originally Posted by KakatoView Post

Is David Suzuki still being chauferred around to his conferences in that huge black limo?

Do you still beat women?

Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Nice repetition of lies though...

Yes that is mostly what the greenies do. A lie is as good as the truth if it gets donations from the gullible.

The irony is lost on you apparently. You're the gullible one parroting lies here.
 
Kakato
#11
Yes,we should all follow China's example of looking after the environment.
 
Tonington
#12
Quote: Originally Posted by KakatoView Post

Yes,we should all follow China's example of looking after the environment.

No, but we shouldn't follow the advice of an energy industry apologist either.
 
Kakato
Avatar
#13
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

No, but we shouldn't follow the advice of an energy industry apologist either.

That's right,lets stick to facts,fact is Alberta has some of the most regulated industy in the world and are under a microscope 24/7.
We also lead the world in new technology to be more environmentally responsible.

I have a few awards under my belt for reclamation participated in for the territories and B.C.
Alberta doesnt get awards yet but they do more then most.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#14
Quote: Originally Posted by KakatoView Post

That's right,lets stick to facts,fact is Alberta has some of the most regulated industy in the world and are under a microscope 24/7.

Right, yet somehow the concentrations of 7 heavy metals has been allowed to exceed the minimum requirements set out by Canadian and Albertan law for the protection of aquatic life.

Alberta and the oil sands industry has denied for years that a problem exists, despite multiple independent investigations. A province that makes money off this industry is also supposed to be monitoring the environmental standards...

Seems like a possible conflict of interest to me. I mean maybe we don't need arms length monitors like the Auditor General in Ottawa either. The government should be trusted to do the right thing always, right?

Yeah right...
 
Cliffy
Avatar
#15
There is no way to strip mine and be environmentally sound. Strip mining by its very nature is an environmental disaster no matter how much you try to mitigate the outcome. A huge chunk of earth has been torn out, toxic materials have been exposed. The tar sands have strip mine a vast area. No amount of reclamation or mitigation will ever return the area to its natural self. I say, stop all oil exploration and exploitation. Focus on alternatives. People have no choice but to use oil at present because it is all that is available because all our energy money goes into the oil industry instead of development of alternatives. The argument that there are no viable alternatives is pure BS propaganda. The only reason there is no viable alternatives is because Big Oil is hogging all the money and resources. The only thing stopping us from a 180 degree turn in efficient energy is greed, pure and simple. We have the technology, the scientific know how but industry does not have the will.
 
Kakato
Avatar
#16
The strip mines I worked at in B.C. won the jade for reclamation many years in a row and I bet if you flew over you would not be able to tell where the open pits were.

Clear cut logging does far more damage then strip mining.
 
Cliffy
Avatar
#17
Quote: Originally Posted by KakatoView Post

The strip mines I worked at in B.C. won the jade for reclamation many years in a row and I bet if you flew over you would not be able to tell where the open pits were.

Clear cut logging does far more damage then strip mining.

I would agree about clear cut logging. When I lived near Quesnel, they clear cut everything within a hundred miles of that place. It was so bad they had to cut the tourist corridor along side the Barkerville highway because there was nothing left to log. We won't even get into all the oil cans and other environmental crap they left on landing or the used oil they used to keep down the dust on roads and oil and fuel leaking from machinery, etc.
 
Kakato
Avatar
#18
Quote: Originally Posted by ToningtonView Post

Right, yet somehow the concentrations of 7 heavy metals has been allowed to exceed the minimum requirements set out by Canadian and Albertan law for the protection of aquatic life.

Alberta and the oil sands industry has denied for years that a problem exists, despite multiple independent investigations. A province that makes money off this industry is also supposed to be monitoring the environmental standards...

Seems like a possible conflict of interest to me. I mean maybe we don't need arms length monitors like the Auditor General in Ottawa either. The government should be trusted to do the right thing always, right?

Yeah right...

While as a junior inspector for encanna I found out how tough enviro laws are,not them that gets the fine or jail time bud.
You dont take a pi** off a lease site without a permit and it would take weeks to get a permit.
I dont know where you get the idea that the industry can do as they please anymore.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#19
Quote: Originally Posted by KakatoView Post

I dont know where you get the idea that the industry can do as they please anymore.

Read the paper I posted in the other thread. That's where the idea comes from.
 
Kakato
Avatar
#20
Quote: Originally Posted by CliffyView Post

I would agree about clear cut logging. When I lived near Quesnel, they clear cut everything within a hundred miles of that place. It was so bad they had to cut the tourist corridor along side the Barkerville highway because there was nothing left to log. We won't even get into all the oil cans and other environmental crap they left on landing or the used oil they used to keep down the dust on roads and oil and fuel leaking from machinery, etc.

I spent 4 years working in the bush and know how bad it was,people used to also drive into the hills to change their oil in their vehicles back then,i'm guilty of this too.

The strip mines use potash now instead of oil or a mixture of tree sap and potash,calcium is rarely used anymore for dust control.
The one mine I was at in B.C. was very good at being environmentally responsible.
Same with the one in Nunavut,But the mines of 20 years ago have left a huge toxic mess,same with the tailings ponds,MFT is ver bad stuff and needs to be cleaned up.
The gold mines polluted the lands and waters with cyanide and littered the tundra with used oil drums in the north.
Me and one other guy cleaned up and contained approx. 2000 twenty year old diesel drums in the last exploration camp I was manager at with him in the Arctic.They got an award for that cleanup.

Time to be pro active and clean things up and make sure it doesnt happen again,not point fingers and play the blame game.
 
Cobalt_Kid
#21
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

Would you rather we immediately destroyed our economy and way of life on the off chance it would stop global warming? The cities would be the first to go with no more transporting of food to them and no heat or cooking facilities even if there was a bit of food. No water or sewer either.
I'm not advocating free spewing of pollution but it is not that simple to change a system that has evolved over many years just because s couple of gloom and doomers say so. These people? have cried wolf and lied a few too many times causing many unnecessary disruptions to peoples lives.

A little pain now to avoid a lot later, that's the choice, and it's a hell of a lot more than an off chance.

We're altering the chemical composition of the Earth's atmosphere at unprecedented rates and expecting what, a mild climatic response? If you look at the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum there was a slow buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere due to geological activity as the Indian plate moved rapidly(about 8 inches a year) northward to collide with Asia. C02 increased at less than +0.01 ppm per year and eventually resulted in a global average temperature spike of between 5-9 degrees C. The warming resulted in the repositioning of cold water submergence to lower warmer latitudes and saw a large release(death burps) of methane hydrates of which there was probably about 3,000 gigatonnes in seabed formations.

We're increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by over +2 ppm per year and there is probably over 5,000 gigatonnes of methane hydrates in tundra and seafloor deposits. Climatologists don't call it the climate bomb for nothing.

Claiming the economy is more important than the environment is absurd, without a stable environment the economy is eventually going to collapse anyway. With the inevitable change already in pipeline now, some scientists like James Lovelock are already predicting the collapse of many cities in areas that will not be able to provide the food and water resources necessary.

We're already heading into a crisis scenario.
 
captain morgan
#22
Quote: Originally Posted by Cobalt_KidView Post

We're already heading into a crisis scenario.


Still?

I've heard the same hue and cry 30 years ago.
 
mentalfloss
-1
#23
Quote: Originally Posted by Cobalt_KidView Post

A little pain now to avoid a lot later, that's the choice, and it's a hell of a lot more than an off chance.
We're altering the chemical composition of the Earth's atmosphere at unprecedented rates and expecting what, a mild climatic response? If you look at the Paleocene-Eocene Thermal Maximum there was a slow buildup of CO2 in the atmosphere due to geological activity as the Indian plate moved rapidly(about 8 inches a year) northward to collide with Asia. C02 increased at less than +0.01 ppm per year and eventually resulted in a global average temperature spike of between 5-9 degrees C. The warming resulted in the repositioning of cold water submergence to lower warmer latitudes and saw a large release(death burps) of methane hydrates of which there was probably about 3,000 gigatonnes in seabed formations.
We're increasing CO2 concentrations in the atmosphere by over +2 ppm per year and there is probably over 5,000 gigatonnes of methane hydrates in tundra and seafloor deposits. Climatologists don't call it the climate bomb for nothing.
Claiming the economy is more important than the environment is absurd, without a stable environment the economy is eventually going to collapse anyway. With the inevitable change already in pipeline now, some scientists like James Lovelock are already predicting the collapse of many cities in areas that will not be able to provide the food and water resources necessary.
We're...

Quote has been trimmed, See full post: View Post
Post#666!

 
lone wolf
#24
Did anyone listen?
 
captain morgan
#25
I couldn't tel you if that is/was the case
 
Cobalt_Kid
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by captain morganView Post

Still?

I've heard the same hue and cry 30 years ago.

So everything is OK?

The models from people like James Hansen that predicted the changes 30 years ago that we're already seeing today indicate very catastrophic consequences if we continue on the course we're on.

Keep in mind that it takes decades and even centuries for the full effects of the changes we're making today to come about.

Quote: Originally Posted by mentalflossView Post

Post#666!

FEAR ME!

Sorry, I couldn't resist.
 
ironsides
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by Cobalt_KidView Post

So everything is OK?

The models from people like James Hansen that predicted the changes 30 years ago that we're already seeing today indicate very catastrophic consequences if we continue on the course we're on.

Keep in mind that it takes decades and even centuries for the full effects of the changes we're making today to come about.



FEAR ME!

Sorry, I couldn't resist.


The important thing is that you feel good about yourself.
 
taxslave
Avatar
#28
Claiming the economy is more important than the environment is absurd, without a stable environment the economy is eventually going to collapse anyway. With the inevitable change already in pipeline now, some scientists like James Lovelock are already predicting the collapse of many cities in areas that will not be able to provide the food and water resources necessary.


So should I tell the bank there will be no mortgage payment this month? Somehow I don't think they will care all that much that our industries closed down and put us out of work because somebody thinks starving in a pristine environment is better than working on better methods of extracting the resources that we need.
 
Tonington
Avatar
#29
I think the banks will care if their customers can't repay their loans. I guess they can always get more bailouts...
 
Cobalt_Kid
#30
Quote: Originally Posted by taxslaveView Post

So should I tell the bank there will be no mortgage payment this month? Somehow I don't think they will care all that much that our industries closed down and put us out of work because somebody thinks starving in a pristine environment is better than working on better methods of extracting the resources that we need.

Then go ahead and tell your kids their future is going to be a lot harsher than ours was, and that their grandkids and beyond may have no future.

Do I need to point out how ridiculous it is to focus on the short-term disruption of switching to a low GHG emitting energy model while ignoring the devastating effects of the current course we're on collectively as a species?

Read my original post and a few of the texts I've listed.

- there is no credible challenge to Anthropogenic Global Warming as Naomi Oreskes found in her survey of the ISI web of knowledge more than five years ago, the whole skeptic movement is almost totally industry funded the same way it was with tobacco and has involved some of the same players on the science side(Fred Seitz, S. Fred Singer and Richard Lindzen)

- According to one of the most experienced and well versed EXPERTS on climate change if we burn all fossil fuels then a runaway greenhouse is a "dead certainty", his words. In case you don't understand what that means imagine a world with an average global temperature of over 100 degrees C, kind of tough to find a job in that scenario don't you think. That's what James Hansen says we're heading for with our current course of massive construction of coal fired power plants and tar sands exploitation as well as exploring for and consuming every bit of oil and natural gas we can find.

- Climate change is already making the world a much more dangerous and expensive place to live, if you're a homeowner in Florida then the $100,000 deductable on home insurance in the case of hurricane destruction makes living in that state less and less tenable, not to mention the facts of stronger hurricanes. Many severe weather events will increase in strength due to the higher amount of water vapour in a warmer atmosphere. As climate is weather averaged over time, all current weather can be assigned a certain percentage due to Global Warming and the fossil fuel sector is already facing increasing lawsuits over weather related damage and it will increase in the future, so where's the economic future there anyway.

Even without a runaway greenhouse the effects of doing nothing to change for fear of the short-term consequences will result in ecological devastation. Sea level is going to go up no matter what we do now, the only question is how high. Greenland and West Antarctic are losing about 100 cubic kilometres of ice a year each and the breakdown of iceshelves means the acceleration of movement of land bound icesheets into the ocean. With the large scale breakdown of those two ice caps we're looking at an over 30 foot increase of sea level in the future, if the climate gets warms enough the East Antarctic sheet will lose stability and the sea level rise could exceed 200 feet, try and calculate the economic cost of the loss of all coastal cities and entire countries and states like Florida and Bangladesh.

Pretending this isn't happening or it isn't serious is human, it's easier to just go with the flow for many people and let someone else take responsibility for the consequences in the future... it's also one of least admirable qualities of our species.

Quote: Originally Posted by ironsidesView Post

The important thing is that you feel good about yourself.

When it comes to this issue all I get is a sick feeling in the pit of my stomach...
 

Similar Threads

15
Autism caused by wide ....................
by VanIsle | Jun 13th, 2010
12
Attempted Suicide/Suicide/Murder
by Jersay | May 13th, 2006
4
country wide protest
by neallo | Feb 19th, 2006
0
Wide Screen DVDs
by missile | Sep 4th, 2005
40
Islamophobia spreading far and wide
by moghrabi | Dec 29th, 2004
no new posts