Al Gore is BACK in an Inconvenient Sequel
- Thread starter mentalfloss
- Start date
Yes, compared to the entire territory of China, we have zero pollution.
And then you wonder why people think you're dumb.
And then you wonder why people think you're dumb.
Zero is a stretch but one day of china spewing pretty much wipes out the miniscule amount we think we keep from the atmosphere, not easy to get a definitive handle as science types can't agree on how to measure it....only politicians are in the know.
So you don't know the difference between real emissions and net emissions. Why didn't you just say so? Norway played the same game too. You see, the game works by estimating or projecting how much emissions will be generated by new economic growth over a given period of time. Then you factor in how much were actually generated over that period and compare it with your projection and if it's lower, ta-daaa, you have a "reduction" that you can give carbon taxes the credit for.
See, Norway introduced a carbon tax in 1991. It was an 18% average across the board with gasoline being slapped with a 40% carbon tax. From 1991-2008 Norway claimed to have reduced carbon emissions by 16% when the reality is they increased by 15% over that same period. It's pretty much the same trick corporations use to write off a profit as a loss. Something you would be very familiar with if you actually worked in the high flying finance sector.
And you're a retard who thinks anyone who doesn't buy your bullshit is some conbot Trumptard. I voted Conservative once in 50 years. Hardly makes me a conbot. Having one's head firmly planted in reality and pragmatism is NOT heresy you pathetic moron. Yet ironically, you idiots act like it is.
You live in a false reality of what you think the world should be like as opposed to how it really is. You've managed to convince yourself that authoritarianism is actually progressive. And now you're buying into the lie that carbon taxes work. There is not ONE modern country or sub-sovereign state that has actually made any real reductions in carbon emissions via a carbon tax. Not one. The only real decline in emissions in BC was between 2008 and 2010 when the decline had more to do with the economic downturn than any tax. Since then, BC's carbon emissions have been steadily climbing.
But here's the real irony. From 2000-2008 BC's emissions were steadily declining. Once the carbon tax came into effect, emissions started increasing again. Well, after the recession induced decrease that is. Total GHG emissions for BC in 2008 were 67,000 kilotonnes. In 2014 the province generated 64,500 kilotonnes. Again, not exactly what one would call a real reduction or a resounding success for carbon taxes. The reduction in fuel use also likely had little to do with the carbon tax considering the 2.3 cents/L was put on gasoline at a time when gas was $1.50/L in Vancouver. Of course the assumption that the carbon tax did reduce fuel use also presumes nobody did any cross-border fill ups where gas is much cheaper.
But yeah, if you think it was worth over $800 million to reduce their net carbon output by a whopping total of less than 3 metric tonnes over the course of a decade, then I really have to wonder just what it is you do in the high flying world of finance. I sure as hell hope you're not some kind of investment counselor.
Ultimately though there are two harsh realities you all need to deal with. 1) Assuming the entire industrial first world eliminated all sources of GHG emissions, it would still be wiped right out by about 27 days worth of Chinese productivity.
And 2) Even if the entire planet met it's 2050 reduction goals today, it would change nothing. It helps if you understand what a natural cycle is though.
All you need to know about Al Gore:
EXCLUSIVE: Al Gore's Home Devours 34 Times Mo | The Daily Caller
EXCLUSIVE: Al Gore's Home Devours 34 Times Mo | The Daily Caller
All I need to know is when he is going to put his seaside mansion on the market . Until I see that I can't and won't believe his claims about rising sea levels .
Those facts.....about as objective as religion you don't believe in....non?.....
Al Gore’s Carbon Footprint Doesn’t Matter
Conservatives say environmentalists are hypocrites if they consume more energy than the average American. It's a deceitful, disingenuous argument.
Conservatives say environmentalists are hypocrites if they consume more energy than the average American. It's a deceitful, disingenuous argument.
Why Al Gore’s House Matters
https://creativedestruction.wordpress.com/2007/02/28/why-al-gores-house-matters/
https://creativedestruction.wordpress.com/2007/02/28/why-al-gores-house-matters/
I know, I know... It's hard to accept reality when it doesn't fit in with your ideology, but chin-up camper, you'll always have your career in finance to fall back on
Al Gore’s Carbon Footprint Doesn’t Matter
Conservatives say environmentalists are hypocrites if they consume more energy than the average American. It's a deceitful, disingenuous argument.
Excuse me?
Al Gore lecturing us on carbon emissions is like a Catholic priest giving a sermon on the sins of homosexual acts and pedophilia, while getting head from an altar boy in full view of the congregation.
Only an idiot leftist would swallow (pun intended) this garbage, because facts don't matter to the left, only ideology matters.
You're a fool if you think that enacting policy is the same as personal responsibility.
The fact that Al Gore has a large footprint only strengthens the case for environmental policy.
Enjoy your carbon tax.
Yes, just like all of those pipelines that you believed in. :lol: