Pessimistic about climate

[The Green Barbarian]

I agree with Mark Carney here, but not in the way that he wants. It is important to take into account the man-made climate change myth in financial decisions, but only when looking at what horrible cost increases that the losers still pumping this myth want to introduce to projects, all in the name of an apocalyptic fairy tale. It's important to review all the damage that these horrible people want to do to the economy, so that these people can be singled out, and shamed, for wanting to bring so much human suffering into the world. For no reason whatsoever.

UN's Mark Carney says 'enormous' stranded assets show the need for a rapid energy transition

The likelihood of fossil fuel assets being rendered worthless underscores the need to decarbonize the world's economy as quickly as possible, according to Mark Carney, the U.N.'s special envoy on climate action and finance.

His comments come in the runup to COP26, one of the most important climate summits ever held. The U.K. will host U.N.-brokered talks in Glasgow, Scotland from Oct. 31 through to Nov. 12.

Speaking to CNBC's Steve Sedgwick for the Sustainable Future Forum, Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, said it was essential to "retool the plumbing" of financial markets so that every financial decision can take climate change into account. This includes steering lending away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy alternatives.

"We need to mainstream this transition to net zero if we are going to get to where the world needs," Carney said in an interview aired on Thursday.

As part of this effort to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, Carney referenced the U.N.'s Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, or GFANZ, that is seeking to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/markets ... d=msedgntp

[foenix]

I agree with Mark Carney here, but not in the way that he wants. It is important to take into account the man-made climate change myth in financial decisions, but only when looking at what horrible cost increases that the losers still pumping this myth want to introduce to projects, all in the name of an apocalyptic fairy tale. It's important to review all the damage that these horrible people want to do to the economy, so that these people can be singled out, and shamed, for wanting to bring so much human suffering into the world. For no reason whatsoever.

UN's Mark Carney says 'enormous' stranded assets show the need for a rapid energy transition

The likelihood of fossil fuel assets being rendered worthless underscores the need to decarbonize the world's economy as quickly as possible, according to Mark Carney, the U.N.'s special envoy on climate action and finance.

His comments come in the runup to COP26, one of the most important climate summits ever held. The U.K. will host U.N.-brokered talks in Glasgow, Scotland from Oct. 31 through to Nov. 12.

Speaking to CNBC's Steve Sedgwick for the Sustainable Future Forum, Carney, the former governor of the Bank of England, said it was essential to "retool the plumbing" of financial markets so that every financial decision can take climate change into account. This includes steering lending away from fossil fuels and toward renewable energy alternatives.

"We need to mainstream this transition to net zero if we are going to get to where the world needs," Carney said in an interview aired on Thursday.

As part of this effort to reach net-zero carbon emissions by 2050, Carney referenced the U.N.'s Glasgow Financial Alliance for Net Zero, or GFANZ, that is seeking to accelerate the transition to a low-carbon economy.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/markets ... d=msedgntp

"Myth"? Haven't you got the word from the Trump led GOP Mothership about what to say about climate change now? Their current flip flop messaging on man made climate change is........ yes, definitely climate change is happening AND man is causing it BUT here's the escape route.......we don't know how much man is influencing the change in climate is the new GOP man made climate change goose stepping spill from the GOP headquarters........NOT as before, we don't believe it's happening at all. Gotta change with the times, hey?

[Septuagenarian]

Good interview (sorry if already posted, I'm skipping a lot of pages in this thread)...

Thanks Glacier. I always have an open mind when it comes to Professor Peterson.

Also, I just downloaded, Apocalypse Never: Why Environmental Alarmism Hurts Us All, by Michael Shellenberger from the Edmonton Public e-Library, and I see where the OK Library carries a hard copy.

https://orl.bibliocommons.com/v2/record/S111C588845

BTW I love Professor Peterson's 'rant on Climate change as he makes some real good points in his inimitable style.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lOfZgf-YecQ

So right now I'm reading the book and then I'm planning on watching the video.

Is anybody else on that track, or does anybody plan to obtain the book and follow that track? Or will it be just the video and, "good interview," as Glacier says, with no discussion at all?

Okay, I'm done.

[Glacier]

So right now I'm reading the book and then I'm planning on watching the video.

Is anybody else on that track, or does anybody plan to obtain the book and follow that track? Or will it be just the video and, "good interview," as Glacier says, with no discussion at all?

Have patience. Some of us have flippin' jobs and families, so I haven't even gotten back to this thread let alone get to the Library. I might read the book over Christmas. It looks interesting for sure.

[Septuagenarian]

So right now I'm reading the book and then I'm planning on watching the video.

Is anybody else on that track, or does anybody plan to obtain the book and follow that track? Or will it be just the video and, "good interview," as Glacier says, with no discussion at all?

Have patience. Some of us have flippin' jobs and families, so I haven't even gotten back to this thread let alone get to the Library. I might read the book over Christmas. It looks interesting for sure.

Sorry, I mean I'm done.

[Septuagenarian]

Per. Dr. Peterson's orders, I'm scrambling my password and nuking the associated e-mail account. That should do it.

Oh, and thanks for all your help, ferri. You and the remaining mods are the best.

[The Green Barbarian]

A target for rich countries to provide poor nations with $100 billion in aid each year to tackle global warming will be missed, officials said Monday, dealing a blow to upcoming U.N. climate talks in Glasgow.

Senior officials from Canada and Germany who were tasked with breaking a deadlock in negotiations ahead of next week's summit announced that current data shows the goal won't be reached until 2023 — three years later than agreed.

“While developed countries have significantly scaled up their support over the last decade, new analysis shows the $100 billion goal was unlikely to have been met in 2020 and is likely to also fall short in 2021 and 2022,” the officials said in a statement.

They expressed confidence that “developed countries can mobilize more than $100 billion per year” from 2024 onward, but that is unlikely to satisfy poor nations, who have insisted that the original target must be met.

“The $100 billion of climate finance is not only a lifeline to poor and vulnerable communities on the front line of a climate crisis they did not cause, it’s also the bare minimum that rich countries need to do to hold up their end of the bargain at COP26," said Mohamed Adow, director of Nairobi-based environmental think tank Power Shift Africa.

Adow warned the plan now submitted to the UK to take to the COP26 talks in Glasgow should not be considered “mission accomplished.”

“Poor nations will not be conned and the leaders of the developed world need to ... get this money on the table if COP26 is going to be a success,” he said.

https://www.castanet.net/edition/news-s ... htm#349593

What's with this idiotic and incredibly stupid communist lingo "rich nations" and "poor nations". Good grief, thanks to our idiot PM and his brain-dead party, Canada is over a trillion in debt. That's not a "rich nation" at all. We have Indigenous people without clean drinking water, and we're a "rich nation"? What kind of total garbage is this??? Man do the people pushing this stupid man-made climate change myth just suck. Such utter scum!! There is no "climate crisis". This is just lies upon total lies.

[The Green Barbarian]

China needs more coal to avert a power crisis — but it's not likely to turn to Australia for supply

China is facing its worst power crisis in years due to a coal shortage. While Australia has the coal Beijing needs, the world's second-largest economy is unlikely to reverse an unofficial ban on Australian coal imports anytime soon, analysts told CNBC.

That's despite recent media reports suggesting that China is releasing small quantities of Australian coal that was stuck at Chinese ports for months due to the ban.

"Reports that small quantities of Australian coal were allowed to clear customs in China have increased speculation that Chinese authorities will look to relax the import ban on Australian coal," Vivek Dhar, mining and energy commodities analyst at the Commonwealth Bank of Australia, told CNBC.

"We don't think Chinese authorities will relax China's ban on Australian coal this winter," he said.

Late last year, China stopped buying Australian coal. That happened as trade tensions between the two countries soared after Canberra backed a call for an international inquiry into Beijing's handling of the Covid-19 outbreak.

Before that, Australia was a major coal supplier to China — in 2019, some 38% of Chinese thermal coal imports came from Australia.

Since mid-August, at least 20 provinces across the country have reported power cuts of varying extent. That was due to several factors including a shortage of coal supplies, tougher government mandates to cut emissions and higher manufacturing demand as the global economy bounces back from pandemic lows.

Officials have reportedly urged top state-owned energy companies to secure supplies for the upcoming winter at all costs.

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/money/markets ... d=msedgntp

Let's get that coal consumption back up before these enviro-idiots start killing people! And killing people they will, all in the name of apocalyptic fairy tales. The idiots still pushing this fraud truly are evil.

[The Green Barbarian]

Here's a primary example of just how DUMB and how harmful enviro-nutters are when it comes to the economy. These people don't understand that there are two kinds of coal - thermal coal and metallurgical coal, or "met coal". Without met coal, you can't make steel, and without steel, you can't build wind turbines or Teslas. The world needs met coal, or you can't build all of the garbage that enviro-nuts want to have "renewable energy". These people just hear the word "coal" and immediately start babbling about "climate targets".

This is a PRIME example of why the world needs to shrug off this whole man-made climate change lunacy. Too many horrible decisions that directly and negatively affect mankind are being made because of this fairy tale. Why isn't anyone educating these people on why met coal is needed???

https://www.mining-technology.com/featu ... e-pledges/

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/video/uk ... d=msedgntp

[rustled]

Here's a primary example of just how DUMB and how harmful enviro-nutters are when it comes to the economy. These people don't understand that there are two kinds of coal - thermal coal and metallurgical coal, or "met coal". Without met coal, you can't make steel, and without steel, you can't build wind turbines or Teslas. The world needs met coal, or you can't build all of the garbage that enviro-nuts want to have "renewable energy". These people just hear the word "coal" and immediately start babbling about "climate targets".

This is a PRIME example of why the world needs to shrug off this whole man-made climate change lunacy. Too many horrible decisions that directly and negatively affect mankind are being made because of this fairy tale. Why isn't anyone educating these people on why met coal is needed???

https://www.mining-technology.com/featu ... e-pledges/

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/news/video/uk ... d=msedgntp

They seem too busy with close-minded activism to understand the issues.

Perhaps start with reading "Unsettled" or "Apocalypse Never"?

[The Green Barbarian]

Rex Murphy: On climate change, the CBC has crossed the line from news agency to PMO mouthpiece
To save time and money, why not just have the news anchors read press releases from the Prime Minister's Office?

I’d like to start with an excerpt from a recent public document. It’s a bit longish but you need to catch the flavour of the thing. It has a magnificently “certain” tone, speaks of vast issues, asserts a Universalist impact, and has dread warnings for our country, Canada. Then I will offer a quiz. Here is the excerpt:

“The impact of climate on our changing planet may be the most pressing story of our time.

“It is an environmental story, yes, but it’s also about health, the economy, jobs, energy, food, water, security, geopolitics, justice and equity. No sector will be spared its impact. Climate change will define every aspect of our lives and those of generations to come.

“The consequences of increased greenhouse gas emissions from human activity should be a surprise to no one: According to projections by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Canada will experience increasingly warmer temperatures and more extreme highs; sea levels will rise on most of our coasts, causing greater coastal flooding and erosion; ocean acidification will increase; this country’s glaciers, permafrost and snow cover will decrease; hurricanes, storms and dust storms will intensify.”

SNIP

Has the CBC abandoned both curiosity and the responsibility to question, which are the very essence of journalism? For emphasis, let me make the absolutely simple point — the first duty of journalism is to ask questions, to inquire, to challenge. Where in that statement above is there even a breath of the need to question, inquire or challenge?

On global warming the CBC is acting far more like a Vatican Council attempting to ward off heretics than a news agency. It is so deeply imprisoned in the woke, or progressive, or social warrior mentality that it has forgotten its function. And lost the Canadian public it still fantasizes it serves.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-mu ... mouthpiece

[rustled]

Rex Murphy: On climate change, the CBC has crossed the line from news agency to PMO mouthpiece
To save time and money, why not just have the news anchors read press releases from the Prime Minister's Office?

I’d like to start with an excerpt from a recent public document. It’s a bit longish but you need to catch the flavour of the thing. It has a magnificently “certain” tone, speaks of vast issues, asserts a Universalist impact, and has dread warnings for our country, Canada. Then I will offer a quiz. Here is the excerpt:

“The impact of climate on our changing planet may be the most pressing story of our time.

“It is an environmental story, yes, but it’s also about health, the economy, jobs, energy, food, water, security, geopolitics, justice and equity. No sector will be spared its impact. Climate change will define every aspect of our lives and those of generations to come.

“The consequences of increased greenhouse gas emissions from human activity should be a surprise to no one: According to projections by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC), Canada will experience increasingly warmer temperatures and more extreme highs; sea levels will rise on most of our coasts, causing greater coastal flooding and erosion; ocean acidification will increase; this country’s glaciers, permafrost and snow cover will decrease; hurricanes, storms and dust storms will intensify.”

SNIP

Has the CBC abandoned both curiosity and the responsibility to question, which are the very essence of journalism? For emphasis, let me make the absolutely simple point — the first duty of journalism is to ask questions, to inquire, to challenge. Where in that statement above is there even a breath of the need to question, inquire or challenge?

On global warming the CBC is acting far more like a Vatican Council attempting to ward off heretics than a news agency. It is so deeply imprisoned in the woke, or progressive, or social warrior mentality that it has forgotten its function. And lost the Canadian public it still fantasizes it serves.

https://nationalpost.com/opinion/rex-mu ... mouthpiece

Indeed!

It “out-Herods Herod;” it is more IPCC than the IPCC.

[The Green Barbarian]

https://www.msn.com/en-ca/video/news/wh ... d=msedgntp

And here it is folks - you must all change your ways immediately and drop your "lifestyle", or....dun dun dun....man made climate change is going to get you!! What a total crock. Just such massive BS.

[erinmore3775]

Blanket statements like "No More Oil" and "No Coal" do more harm to the movement towards lowering GHG than they help. They are just political slogans designed as rallying cries and all too often ignore the underlining facts.

About 40% of petroleum based production is used in the manufacturing of daily used items. From fabrics, to medicines, to electronics, to cosmetics, to agricultural products, to construction materials all of these are based on petroleum based carbon. A total abandonment of petroleum would mean a catastrophic change in our lifestyle. Similarly over 1 billion tons of coking/met coal is used in the production of steel annually. Canada is a major producer of coking/met coal.

While recycling can meet some of the requirements for Petro based chemical production and steel manufacturing "virgin" product is often necessary for the development of many products. Far greater emphasis should be placed on encouraging recycling technology than screaming for change with broad based statements.

[rustled]

Blanket statements like "No More Oil" and "No Coal" do more harm to the movement towards lowering GHG than they help. They are just political slogans designed as rallying cries and all too often ignore the underlining facts.

About 40% of petroleum based production is used in the manufacturing of daily used items. From fabrics, to medicines, to electronics, to cosmetics, to agricultural products, to construction materials all of these are based on petroleum based carbon. A total abandonment of petroleum would mean a catastrophic change in our lifestyle. Similarly over 1 billion tons of coking/met coal is used in the production of steel annually. Canada is a major producer of coking/met coal.

While recycling can meet some of the requirements for Petro based chemical production and steel manufacturing "virgin" product is often necessary for the development of many products. Far greater emphasis should be placed on encouraging recycling technology than screaming for change with broad based statements.

While I agree with most of this, reduction and reuse are usually far more beneficial than recycling.

For example, IMO we need to get back to building appliances that are more easily repaired than replaced, with skins for consumers who change it up because their appliance's exteriors are scratched or the colours are out of fashion.

Yes, these appliances will cost more to begin with - we'd be paying for the quality of a single refrigerator intended to last over 40 years, versus replacement.

For those downsizing, upsizing because their family is growing or starting out, used refrigerators would be a far better investment, too.

One of the worst thing we've done, from a cradle-to-grave examination of resources and waste, is rely too heavily on recycling.