New study recommends no more fossil fuel plants after 2017

[Nick Danger]

Are you, or those that have this fear, concerned enough to actually alter your/their behaviors?

Yes, I have changed the way I do things. I walk and bike a lot more, use public transit when available even if it means my trip to wherever is going to take longer, and lower the temperature in my home in favour of putting on a sweater. A small contribution on its own, but the cumulative effect can be considerable if more take the same steps, and it beats doing nothing. Still, without the active participation of the corporate and public sectors individual efforts can easily be negated.

 

[captain morgan]

Yes, I have changed the way I do things. I walk and bike a lot more, use public transit when available even if it means my trip to wherever is going to take longer, and lower the temperature in my home in favour of putting on a sweater. A small contribution on its own, but the cumulative effect can be considerable if more take the same steps, and it beats doing nothing. Still, without the active participation of the corporate and public sectors individual efforts can easily be negated.

My hat's off to you in terms of the steps you have taken.... That said, we both can agree that although these actions are laudable, there are nothing close to any solution to your perceived problem.

The fast and dirty analysis here is that the solution to your concern is not cutting back on hydrocarbon usage, but the delivery of a replacement technology(s) that will comply with your goals in addition to a complete overhaul of the existing systems, infrastructure, facilities and consumer products.

Any efforts in achieving your goals have to start here as opposed to cutting-off the only viable and economic alternatives (being the existing power delivery mechanisms) ~ end of story.

 

[coldstream]

The most evironmentally responsible and cheapest generator of energy for Canada is fossil fuel based concentrated thermal energy. There is no replacement on the horizon for the next century.

The good news is it is plentiful, accessible and by far the most environmentally responsible alternative.. far more so than the massively inefficient, expensive and ecologically damaging alternative of solar or wind power. AGW is fodder for fools... it is a scam, a psuedo science, a enviropagan idol.. and it proposes a potentially catastrophic economic 'solution' for an nonexistent problem.

If we get that drooling fool of a PM, Justin, out of office, we can make some realistic plans that won't condemn future generations to enslavement to enviro-idolatry, and impoverishment.

 

[Nick Danger]

The fast and dirty analysis here is that the solution to your concern is not cutting back on hydrocarbon usage, but the delivery of a replacement technology(s) that will comply with your goals in addition to a complete overhaul of the existing systems, infrastructure, facilities and consumer products.

Agreed. The question would be "When?" and will it be in time? It's hard to deny that mounting pressure against fossil fuel use is increasing to the point where it is a political force to be reckoned with, as seen by the reluctance of our elected officials to get behind pipelines in any big way, but forays into the realm of replacement technology are still getting little other than lip service. Supplemental technologies like solar and wind are still, and likely will remain so,just that, supplemental.

 

[mentalfloss]

Youth climate change conference advocates for economic diversity - Edmonton - CBC News

 

[MHz]

It takes a village to keep a child safe from a ladder.

Where was your village when it came to saving you from a head injury?

 

[Tecumsehsbones]

Where was your village when it came to saving you from a head injury?

Take your pills.

 

[MHz]

I think that's what worries me most, that we will pass some point of no return while we bicker the right and wrong of burning fossil fuels.

Just when burning fossil fuel became cheap and efficient and the next step would be to take it to the people who still have no shoes to wear it suddenly become so unsafe that only the elite 3% should actually be using it as any more would cause a mass extinction of all of mankind. That crap when there is ample evidence to show we could put the whole world on fossil fuels and that would be no worse than 1 or 2 more volcanoes going off a year. The point of no return is the ones with no shoes dying off due to lack of clean water and food and medical care. The 3% deserve the best the world can supply and and the 97 % should be culled to keep their numbers as small as possible. Any method, natural or man-made will suffice.

It's also a bone of contention that for the most part, the default position of those in favour of the status quo is to attack and ridicule anyone who suggests we actually do something to reduce fossil fuel consumption,

Pay attention to the proposals, the reduction is for the ones who use the least and have no extra funds to but it if prices go up. Prices go up with a carbon tax and the elite can just pay the increase rate and their services continue as it is at the moment. The extra fare is also passed onto the 'consumers' which further cuts what they can afford. The only thing worse than a scam and that is a bad scam.

because any steps that would have any measure of effectiveness are either expensive or inconvenient.

Needlessly expensive at that and you are forgetting the 'cost over-runs' that are standard for when the west takes on any project, let alone one using public funds.

Are we leaving a mess behind for our descendants that they won't be able to fix?

We have allowed thing to get so expensive that we can't pay for it and we are the generation that had the most free money and we still maxed out the credit cards. The only option we are leaving them is to default on the national debt and all personal debts to the banks. We really did them good didn't we?? When the companies that were here got tougher restriction on their pollution levels they just moved operations to a country where they could get around those regulations, lot of good it did. When Texaco was polluting the Amazon we didn't care as it wasn't on our land and gas might have been $0.25 cheaper per gallon so we turned a blind eye as far as warning the citizens down there what was going on.

 

[taxslave]

The most evironmentally responsible and cheapest generator of energy for Canada is fossil fuel based concentrated thermal energy. There is no replacement on the horizon for the next century.

The good news is it is plentiful, accessible and by far the most environmentally responsible alternative.. far more so than the massively inefficient, expensive and ecologically damaging alternative of solar or wind power. AGW is fodder for fools... it is a scam, a psuedo science, a enviropagan idol.. and it proposes a potentially catastrophic economic 'solution' for an nonexistent problem.

If we get that drooling fool of a PM, Justin, out of office, we can make some realistic plans that won't condemn future generations to enslavement to enviro-idolatry, and impoverishment.

Hydro power is cheaper and more environmentally friendly but there is a finite supply.

 

[Walter]

Hydro power is cheaper and more environmentally friendly but there is a finite supply.

Niagara Falls won't fit in my tank.

 

[taxslave]

Youth climate change conference advocates for economic diversity - Edmonton - CBC News

So other than demand that somebody(government mostly) do something what are all these goofballs doing to start manufacturing facilities in Alberta? How many solar power plants are they building? Is their electric car factory up and running yet?
While these retards piss and moan that sombody must do something the real world is. BC is building Site C finally to generate more clean hydro power. The electric car manufacturer in Errington is still building cars like they have for the past 10 years. Don't see any of these people driving one though.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

Niagara Falls won't fit in my tank.

You need a bigger vehicle.

 

[EagleSmack]

So other than demand that somebody(government mostly) do something what are all these goofballs doing to start manufacturing facilities in Alberta? How many solar power plants are they building? Is their electric car factory up and running yet?
While these retards piss and moan that sombody must do something the real world is. BC is building Site C finally to generate more clean hydro power. The electric car manufacturer in Errington is still building cars like they have for the past 10 years. Don't see any of these people driving one though.

I wonder if they've asked their parents to invest their portfolios into alternative energy and divest from fossil fuels.

 

[captain morgan]

Agreed. The question would be "When?" and will it be in time? It's hard to deny that mounting pressure against fossil fuel use is increasing to the point where it is a political force to be reckoned with, as seen by the reluctance of our elected officials to get behind pipelines in any big way, but forays into the realm of replacement technology are still getting little other than lip service. Supplemental technologies like solar and wind are still, and likely will remain so,just that, supplemental.

An interesting article posted by EagleSmack.

Another Climate Alarmist Admits Real Motive Behind Warming Scare | Stock News & Stock Market Analysis - IBD

... Gives one pause for thought regarding the undeniability of global warming, climate change, et al

As for the technological question, until some form of usable and economic replacement si brought forth, it is silly to believe that humanity will magically cut the use of the existing and (to date) most efficient power sources at hand.

I often shake my head and wonder why the collective eco-movement as represented by greenpeace, sierra club, suzuki, etc, etc, etc have not applied all of those millions, possibly, billions of dollars aimed at anti-oil campaigns and not just worked on replacing it... In the end, I believe that the answer to this question is very clear and has little or nothing to do with the save-the-planet position they advertise

 

[gerryh]

Agreed. The question would be "When?" and will it be in time? It's hard to deny that mounting pressure against fossil fuel use is increasing to the point where it is a political force to be reckoned with, as seen by the reluctance of our elected officials to get behind pipelines in any big way, but forays into the realm of replacement technology are still getting little other than lip service. Supplemental technologies like solar and wind are still, and likely will remain so,just that, supplemental.

In time for what? To prevent what? That is the biggest bone of contention at this time. ALL predictions of dire consequences have not come true. Not one single prediction.

 

[darkbeaver]

Easy, there is no fossile fuels being consumened, hydrocarbons grow way down in the bowles of ert. It's all under control, nothing you can do about it, except repent.

 

[mentalfloss]

In time for what? To prevent what? That is the biggest bone of contention at this time. ALL predictions of dire consequences have not come true. Not one single prediction.

There haven't been any dire predictions to happen now.

It's always been from 2050-2100.

 

[IdRatherBeSkiing]

There haven't been any dire predictions to happen now.

It's always been from 2050-2100.

How convenient.

 

[Curious Cdn]

How convenient.

That's what I think. Not my problem, man.

 

[coldstream]

Hydro power is cheaper and more environmentally friendly but there is a finite supply.

As far as i know virtually all of the hydro electric potential in the country has already been tapped. That leaves carbon resources, which are in such abundance, and with modern technology so efficient and clean that they are by far the most environmentally responsible and cheapest resource available to us.