Global Warming: still the ‘Greatest Scam in History’

Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

They are ramping up the bullshit to new heights. They thought it would unite people all hippy circle hug like but its created division that scares the shit out of them. Its political and nothing about environment.

Terence Corcoran: Why the left loves a climate crisis

We had major breaking news Tuesday out of the United Nations’ 25th Conference of the Parties (COP 25) climate change summit in Madrid: Greta, the self-described “angry kid,” had landed. Her boat docked in Lisbon, just as the World Meteorological Organization reported that 2019 had been a cold year for Canadians.

The Greta news drowned out the WMO report, which also found 2019 produced record levels of frigidity in many parts of North America, including “the coldest February on record for several regions in Western Canada, including the city of Vancouver. It was also a rather cold first half of the year in parts of Eastern Canada. There were further outbreaks of unseasonable cold and early-season snowfall in the western and central interior of North America in late September and late October.”

But forget about Canada. Who cares? The WMO reports that 2019 was hotter on average in other parts of the world, which is why Greta Thunberg and an army of young and not-so-young leftists with radical agendas are mounting a global campaign to bulldoze market capitalism and build a new socialist democratic paradise.

Since nobody wants to overthrow capitalism for the usual trumped-up reasons — inequality, worker oppression, racism, fascism, rising corporate control, globalization, middle-class decline, greedy bankers, private property —the scientific claim of a climate crisis offers a new justification.

From Greta’s Extinction Rebellion to Green New Deal advocates in the United States to the champions of socialism in Europe, the left is using climate change to push an another agenda. In a recent commentary, Greta and two other young global activists — Luisa Neubauer from Germany and Angela Valenzuela from Chile — made it clear their objectives transcend climate change. They want climate action that is “powerful and wide-ranging.” After all, they say, “the climate crisis is not just about the environment. It is a crisis of human rights, of justice, and of political will. Colonial, racist, and patriarchal systems of oppression have created and fuelled it. We need to dismantle them all.”

In their reading of the economic world, carbon emissions are the product of market capitalism that needs to be replaced by a government-controlled system that will forcibly eliminate fossil fuels.

In the United States, Green New Deal advocates talk about a green economy, but what they have in mind is a state-directed economic system whose primary official objective is to achieve “net-zero carbon emissions.” The same objectives dominate the Green New Deal advocates in Europe.

One of those net-zero eurogreens is Yanis Varoufakis, the former Greek finance minister who is in Toronto this week to participate in a Munk Debate on the future of capitalism. In case you are wondering, his aim is to tear down market systems.

Varoufakis is a superstar of the democratic socialist left and a collaborator with Canadian radical Naomi Klein and others in the Democracy in Europe Movement 2025 (DiEM25). The objectives of DiEM25 include blending Europe’s “diverse political traditions — Green, radical left, liberal — in order to repair the EU.” By repairing Europe they mean expanding the role of government via vague notions of “democratic government.”

According to Varoufakis, a key part of the new socialist plan for Europe “will require recreating European institutions and a political economy that includes a massive Green New Deal or similar strategy.” Varoufakis said in a recent interview that he aims to “create a vision of a liberal, socialist society that is not based on private property but does use money as a vehicle for exchange and markets as co-ordinating devices.”

Well, at least we get to keep a system based on money.

How far the left will be able to ride climate change as a sort of autonomous electric vehicle on the road to socialism will depend on how soon a broader population of workers and middle-class voters realize they are being taken for a ride.

Accepting that climate change is a real global problem to be solved does not mean abandoning the benefits of market capitalism.

Arthur C. Brooks (who will debate Varoufakis in the Munk Debate on Wednesday) argues that Green New Deal socialism will never happen, at least not in the United States. “There’s no evidence that any government is remotely capable of governing on the scale that they’re talking about. The result would be unimaginable levels of unnecessary secondary consequences.”

Brooks may be right about the U.S. and maybe Canada. Among the people who do not want a Green New Deal is Canadian union leader Leo Gerard, the long-time head of the United Steelworkers of America. In a recent interview with CBC radio, Gerard brought a little common sense to the climate crisis. “The reality is that you’re going to need fossil fuels for at least the next hundred years. What we need to do is, do it in a way that’s going to reduce emissions, capture carbon and be healthy to the environment.”

Gerard said that proposals to ban the mining industry, as occurred during the past U.S. election, demonstrate a lack of economic knowledge and understanding. “You can’t build a wind turbine without one to two tons of copper and cement to hold it down. You can’t do solar panels without aluminum and glass, which is made with sand. You have to mine sand.’

The vast majority of people — in North America and the world — are unlikely to embrace the idea of eliminating fossil fuels from the economy, especially if they realize going fossil-fuel free means embracing radical leftists’ visions.
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

The earth is a rock, a former chunk of a star and on that rock there is a parasite known as life. Live with it.

One galaxy's junk is another galaxy's treasure.

Say no to War. Fight nicely instead.

My other meme is a bumper sticker.

Mickey Mouse wears a Spiro Agnew watch.
Last edited by petros; 1 day ago at 03:19 PM..
Quote: Originally Posted by Mowich View Post

Clog-wearing granola eater? Intellectually challenged climate hysteric?

How about 'fukking twit'?
Quote: Originally Posted by Cliffy View Post

Do you believe her planting a flower will do more than if she started picking the bottles?
Canada's hottest summer ever? Fake news, says Environment Canada | Sheila Gunn Reid

Rebel News
Sheila Gunn Reid of Rebel News reports: Environment and Climate Change Canada’s own messaging shows that our country isn’t burning to the ground!
How big were the subsidies for "big oil" to become "big renewable energy"?

Suncor Energy is significantly expanding its position in Canadian wind power, announcing on Monday it will go ahead with a the first phase of a major new wind farm in Southern Alberta.

The project, called Forty Mile, is located on approximately 50,000 acres of private land, south and east of the town of Bow Island, the company says.

The first $300-million phase will have 200 MW of generating capacity, and is expected to be in commercial service in December 2021.

Suncor and its partners have approximately 100 MW of existing wind power generating capacity in Alberta, Saskatchewan and Ontario.

Free capital spending, drilling & production forecasts - 2019 Guidance with the Daily Oil Bulletin.

Suncor says that once built, the first phase of Forty Mile will consist of 45 4.5 MW wind turbines, a meteorological tower, an electrical collection system, turbine access roads, and temporary construction facilities, delivering renewable electricity to the gird via the Granlea substation, which will connect to the existing 240-kiloVolt transmission line within the project area.

“This unique investment approach in renewable energy is expected to generate double-digit, sustainable economic returns through power generation and retaining the generated carbon credits for utilization in the core business,” the company said.

“This project is part of Suncor’s sustainability strategy, making meaningful progress toward the greenhouse gas intensity reduction target of 30 percent by 2030.”

Forty Mile is also planned with a second 200-MW phase which is targeted for completion in December 2022.
Yep, like it was said the Gov. is investing into Energy companies Green projects to create Carbon credits to offset their Carbon release from their Oil production, wild eh Hoid, Cryin Canadian, Cliffy?
And the subsidy is...

Action on Emerging Renewable Power
The Emerging Renewable Power Program (ERPP) provides up to $200 million to expand the portfolio of commercially viable renewable energy sources available to provinces and territories as they work to reduce GHG emissions from their electricity sectors.
Quote: Originally Posted by Danbones View Post

Canada's hottest summer ever? Fake news, says Environment Canada | Sheila Gunn Reid

Rebel News
Sheila Gunn Reid of Rebel News reports: Environment and Climate Change Canada’s own messaging shows that our country isn’t burning to the ground!

Not even close in this area. 2016 was likely close!
Environment Canada says 2019 ranked at number 25 since 1951 when "the record" starts.

30s and 40s were by far hotter but not included in "the record".
28 years ago, big oil predicted carbon tax was necessary to stop global warming
By Alexander C. Kaufman in News, US News
December 5th 2019

Attached to the Imperial Oil refinery, these are Esso holding tanks. Author: TheKurgan (Wikipedia [CC BY-SA 3.0])
This story was originally published by HuffPost and appears here as part of the Climate Desk collaboration

As far back as 1991, the Canadian arm of Exxon Mobil Corp.’s empire anticipated that a high tax on carbon emissions would be necessary to maintain a stable climate, newly released documents show.

HuffPost reviewed the documents, which show that Imperial Oil ― Canada’s No. 2 petroleum producer, which the world’s largest publicly-traded oil company has long owned ― hired a consulting firm to model which price on carbon would deliver the emissions cuts officials in Ottawa were looking to impose.

This was in the early 1990s, when awareness of global warming had started to go mainstream and talk of regulation seemed to be increasing. An April 1991 memo that then-chief executive A.R. Haynes signed showed it would take a tax of “$55 per tonne of CO2” for Canada “to stabilize CO2 emissions,” roughly the equivalent of $88.50 in today’s Canadian dollars. In United States dollars, that translates to about $41 per metric ton in 1991, or $78 per metric ton in 2019 ― far higher than anything either country has considered.

Imagine the alternate history where the oil industry called for a [$78 per ton] carbon tax.Gernot Wagner, New York University’s Department of Environmental Studies
Gernot Wagner, New York University’s Department of Environmental Studies
Compare that to the leading carbon tax proposal in the 1990s, which called for a price starting at a nickel in 2000 and rising to $2 per metric ton by 2100. The $78 per ton tax was even higher than the roughly $40 per ton carbon price the Obama administration considered and that Exxon Mobil endorsed as part of an ill-fated effort led by a handful of Republican elder statesmen in 2017.

Tesla Cybertruck carbon crushes Ford F-150
Prospects look bleak for Canadian mountains, Arctic and coasts, says IPCC
In the thirty years since École Polytechnique
A 1993 internal Imperial Oil document stated that “very high levels of tax would be required to achieve a CO2 stabilization target.”

The revelations come just weeks after the New York attorney general argued in court that Exxon Mobil misled investors by lowballing the impact carbon pricing would have on the value of its tar sands projects in Canada. Though Imperial suggested in the 1991 memo that the carbon tax best suited to leveling out the country’s emissions was economically unworkable, the document shows the company grasped the magnitude of the looming crisis yet proceeded to misinform the public on the risks.

“Imperial is committed to making further contributions to sound public policy on global warming and to undertaking actions now that make sense in their own right,” the memo read. “This will include widely sharing these findings, updating its inventory of greenhouse gas emissions, funding climate change research programs, implementing economic energy efficiency opportunities, pursuing CO2 disposal opportunities and enhancing the technical and commercial potential of alternative transportation fuels.”

‘Climate Policy Nowadays Would Look Very Different’

Instead, Imperial joined in its parent company’s decades long misinformation campaign to obscure the threat emissions posed to planetary stability.

In 1998, Imperial’s then-CEO Robert Peterson wrote that “carbon dioxide is not a pollutant but an essential ingredient of life on this planet.” In 2004, the company boasted to its shareholders about investing 10-figure sums in new drilling, primarily in Canada’s tar sands, among the world’s dirtiest sources of oil. Last year, the behemoth ramped up oil and gas production to 383,000 barrels per day, up from 375,000 barrels per day in 2017. Profits topped $2.3 billion, or $1.7 billion U.S. dollars, a “best-ever result” barring 2016, when asset sales inflated the annual income.

The previously unpublished 1991 documents, surfaced by the advocacy groups DeSmog and Climate Investigations Center, come from a trove of documents found in the Glenbow Museum archive in the Canadian oil-producing province of Alberta. The first cache, published in 2016, showed that Imperial Oil, like Exxon Mobil, understood the climate effects of burning fossil fuels for decades before embarking on a public relations effort to seed doubt over the realities of global warming.

The latest documents at least partially rewrite the history of the carbon pricing debate, illustrating yet another road not taken once the industry adopted a strategy of denying the realities of climate science in a bid to delay regulation.

“Imagine the alternate history where the oil industry called for a [$78 per ton] carbon tax,” said Gernot Wagner, an energy economist and associate professor at New York University’s Department of Environmental Studies. “Lobbying around this would have been very different in the ’90s had the [$78] figure emerged as the right metric to rally around. Climate policy nowadays would look very different.”

Neither Imperial nor Exxon Mobil responded Monday to requests for comment.

It’s critical to consider the political context in Canada at the time. The country was considering a “Green Plan” in a bid to catch up to major environmental laws passed in the United States. Climate change started to gain international attention. The first global climate summit in Rio de Janeiro was just a year away. In a bid to get ahead, Canadian policymakers attempted to leapfrog the tepid efforts the George H.W. Bush administration was making in the U.S. at the time.

“They either saw this as a threat or an opportunity to make a point about carbon taxes,” said Kert Davies, the founder of the Climate Investigations Center. “The fact that the Canadian policy arena was years ahead of the U.S. was forcing Imperial to behave differently than Exxon.”


The new documents come as the climate crisis is nearing a tipping point, with average temperatures currently on pace to rise by 3.2 degrees Celsius above the baseline average temperature at the start of the industrial era, according to United Nations projections published in November. A separate study last month found the world’s 10 biggest fossil fuel-producing countries are on course to drill 120% more oil, gas and coal by 2030 than would be consistent with keeping warming within 1.5 degrees Celsius, beyond which scientists project catastrophic change.

Lobbying around this would have been very different in the ’90s had the [$78] figure emerged as the right metric to rally around.Gernot Wagner, New York University’s Department of Environmental Studies
The U.N. called the projections last month “bleak.” As it is, billion-dollar disasters are already surging by the year, and scientists say the unprecedented economic changes required to keep warming at levels that could sustain a climate similar to today’s demand political interventions that go far beyond pricing signals that reflect the social cost of emissions.

But taxing carbon emissions is widely viewed as an important tool to hasten the shift away from fossil fuels. Existing proposals to do that range widely. Canada started implementing a $15 per ton carbon tax this year that will rise to $38 per ton in 2022.

In the U.S., the Climate Leadership Council, a nonprofit backed by oil giants, is campaigning for a $40 per ton tax that originally promised to protect oil producers from liability in the growing number of municipal and state lawsuits accusing companies of deliberately misleading the public about climate change, though the group said it has since abandoned that provision. A bill backed by dozens of Democrats and one Republican in Congress would impose a $15 per ton carbon tax that increases by between $10 and $15 each year and could top $100 per ton by 2030.

Other proposals project the need for a much higher price. In October, the International Monetary Fund called for a $75 per ton carbon tax by 2030. That same month, Wagner published a study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences that pegged the price at something closer to $100 per ton, and probably more.

The median value of carbon dioxide emissions’ cost to society in a September 2018 paper published in Nature was $400 per ton.

Had Imperial Oil publicized the findings of its carbon tax projections, the dominant 1990s model “would have looked laughably conservative” calling for a tax of $2 per metric ton, Wagner said. The company’s report said its commissioned study projected devastating impacts on Canada’s economy under a high carbon tax, with losses to gross domestic product of $100 billion in 1991 Canadian dollars between 1990 and 2005. The paper urged balance between “the environmental and economic needs of our society.”

“It would have shown that a lot more complex climate policies would be necessary,” Wagner said. “This adds a big new element to this carbon pricing history.”

This article has been updated to include additional comment from the Climate Leadership Council.
Quote: Originally Posted by Mowich View Post

So I'm watching Global news on Saturday morning and the weather segment comes on with dire warnings of freezing rain complete with instructions on what to do in case your car hits an icy patch...... and this goes on all morning long. Outside the sun is shining and it's 5' - not a hint of rain let alone freezing rain. Roads are clear and dry. Beautiful late fall day. Couldn't help thinking that if the meteorologists can't even get a weather forecast for a single day right how in hell am I supposed to believe climate hysterics predicting the future.

Look to the past, sometimes it,s sunny sometimes it aint.
Its like the fire bombing of Dresden, but no bombs required.
"About 100 bushfires are raging in the Australian state of New South Wales (NSW), with the most severe burning on the outskirts of Sydney.
More than 2,000 firefighters are battling huge blazes, which escalated in intensity late on Thursday.
Footage of one blaze on the southern fringe of the city showed firefighters fleeing as flames surged forward.
Australia's largest city has been blanketed by thick smoke all week, causing a rise in medical problems.
Since October, bushfires have killed six people and destroyed more than 700 homes across Australia.
The long and dangerous summer ahead for Australia
Bushfire victim takes home's remains to parliament
The severity of the blazes so early in the fire season has caused alarm, and prompted calls for greater action to tackle climate change.
More than 1.6 million hectares of land in NSW have been burnt already. Fires have also raged across Queensland, Victoria, South Australia, Western Australia and Tasmania.
'Mega blaze' warning
The fires in NSW are expected to bring emergency warnings on Friday amid hot and windy conditions.
Fire authorities said three blazes north of Sydney had merged into a "mega blaze" on Friday morning, covering more than 300,000 hectares."
Quote: Originally Posted by petros View Post

Environment Canada says 2019 ranked at number 25 since 1951 when "the record" starts.

30s and 40s were by far hotter but not included in "the record".

Well, that's just it, I'd bet in any jurisdiction the size of B.C. or SK. there's probably 10,000 readings taken every day.

Similar Threads

Global Capitalism; Greatest Scam in History
by darkbeaver | Oct 19th, 2018