Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. Vol 2
Discussion
So, COP20 Lima. The 20th time this lot have met.
Thousands and thousands of 'delegates' once again fly halfway around the World (at HUGE cost and entailing a mahoosive Carbon Footprint) to take 'drastic action'...
What happens?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3046...
Thousands and thousands of 'delegates' once again fly halfway around the World (at HUGE cost and entailing a mahoosive Carbon Footprint) to take 'drastic action'...
What happens?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3046...
Article said:
Delegates have approved a framework for setting national pledges to be submitted to a summit next year.
Great. nelly1 said:
So, COP20 Lima. The 20th time this lot have met.
Thousands and thousands of 'delegates' once again fly halfway around the World (at HUGE cost and entailing a mahoosive Carbon Footprint) to take 'drastic action'...
What happens?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3046...
Thousands and thousands of 'delegates' once again fly halfway around the World (at HUGE cost and entailing a mahoosive Carbon Footprint) to take 'drastic action'...
What happens?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3046...
Article said:
Delegates have approved a framework for setting national pledges to be submitted to a summit next year.
Great. 
As per the captioned photoshoot
of delegates posted by dickymint "It's agreed we launch in-depth negotiations to set in train fresh talks progressing the agenda for a new summit to agree to launch in-depth negotiations to set in train fresh talks progressing..."
turbobloke said:
nelly1 said:
So, COP20 Lima. The 20th time this lot have met.
Thousands and thousands of 'delegates' once again fly halfway around the World (at HUGE cost and entailing a mahoosive Carbon Footprint) to take 'drastic action'...
What happens?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3046...
Thousands and thousands of 'delegates' once again fly halfway around the World (at HUGE cost and entailing a mahoosive Carbon Footprint) to take 'drastic action'...
What happens?
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3046...
Article said:
Delegates have approved a framework for setting national pledges to be submitted to a summit next year.
Great. As per the captioned photoshoot
of delegates posted by dickymint "It's agreed we launch in-depth negotiations to set in train fresh talks progressing the agenda for a new summit to agree to launch in-depth negotiations to set in train fresh talks progressing..."For a start he could take the proposed Diesel vehicle band for Paris a full leap forward and cut Paris carbon output to Zero before the talks. That would set a pattern for others to consider.
I suspect the locals might not be too happy though - unless they were all given Renault Zoes or something. One way of "boosting" the economy without falling foul of the EU laws on Member State Subsidies. "It's not me guv, we're only doing it for the environment ...."
Democrats green bs rules on energy production etc etc has consequences
SALEM, N.H. — John York, who owns a small printing business here, nearly fell out of his chair the other day when he opened his electric bill.
For October, he had paid $376. For November, with virtually no change in his volume of work and without having turned up the thermostat in his two-room shop, his bill came to $788, a staggering increase of 110 percent. “This is insane,” he said, shaking his head. “We can’t go on like this.”
The concerns go beyond fears about blighting the countryside and losing property to eminent domain. Environmentalists say it makes no sense to perpetuate the region’s dependence on fossil fuels while it is trying to mitigate the effects of climate change, and many do not want to support the gas-extraction process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, that has made the cheap gas from Pennsylvania available.
in August, the Massachusetts Legislature rejected the plan, saying in part that cheap energy would flood the market and thwart attempts to advance wind and solar projects. That halted the whole effort.
http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http%3A%2F%2Fwww...
SALEM, N.H. — John York, who owns a small printing business here, nearly fell out of his chair the other day when he opened his electric bill.
For October, he had paid $376. For November, with virtually no change in his volume of work and without having turned up the thermostat in his two-room shop, his bill came to $788, a staggering increase of 110 percent. “This is insane,” he said, shaking his head. “We can’t go on like this.”
The concerns go beyond fears about blighting the countryside and losing property to eminent domain. Environmentalists say it makes no sense to perpetuate the region’s dependence on fossil fuels while it is trying to mitigate the effects of climate change, and many do not want to support the gas-extraction process known as hydraulic fracturing, or fracking, that has made the cheap gas from Pennsylvania available.
in August, the Massachusetts Legislature rejected the plan, saying in part that cheap energy would flood the market and thwart attempts to advance wind and solar projects. That halted the whole effort.
http://www.nytimes.com/glogin?URI=http%3A%2F%2Fwww...
Edited by Pesty on Sunday 14th December 22:12
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3039...
But in Antarctica sea ice levels are actually increasing, and this year reached their greatest extent since records began.
But now ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3039... says Arctic sea ice may be more resilient than many observers recognise.
Ali G said:
Antarctic sea ice levels at record (high) levels
http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-2982...
Yet more 'climate chaos' or perhaps a mistake in the measurement of the sea ice?
Not sure that this was predicted by the 'models'
Now, was there not some boat trapped there some time ago?
ARticle says The climate is getting warmer and Arctic sea ice is melting at an alarming rate.http://www.theguardian.com/environment/2014/oct/09...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-2982...
Yet more 'climate chaos' or perhaps a mistake in the measurement of the sea ice?
Not sure that this was predicted by the 'models'
Now, was there not some boat trapped there some time ago?
But in Antarctica sea ice levels are actually increasing, and this year reached their greatest extent since records began.
But now ...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-3039... says Arctic sea ice may be more resilient than many observers recognise.
Cool Heads Offer Views On Toothless Beanfeast Hot Air
Lima is just yet another re-enactment of the three-stage ritual that has become only too familiar over the past 20 years. First, we are treated to months of ludicrously unscientific hype, telling us that the threat of global warming is now worse than ever. Then, they all gather in some agreeable venue, for the “developing” nations – led by China and India – to say they will only play ball if the “developed” world, led by the EU, the US and Japan, pays them $100 billion a year to curb their “carbon emissions”. In days of acrimony and stupefying boredom it emerges that the rich countries aren’t really intending to deliver. Finally, at the eleventh hour – or more likely 4 o’clock in the morning – a “breakthrough” is announced. Everyone has finally agreed on a meaningless document that commits no one to anything.
Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 14 December 2014
In typical fashion, the United Nations climate summit failed to make any real headway on a global agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight global warming. Instead, delegates from 194 countries walked away with a non-binding agreement to come back and negotiate again next year. Some environmentalists and media outlets have tried to spin the agreement reached in Lima, Peru this weekend as a big step towards a real global warming treaty, but critics argue the failed climate summit was no surprise.
Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, 15 December 2014
Lima is just yet another re-enactment of the three-stage ritual that has become only too familiar over the past 20 years. First, we are treated to months of ludicrously unscientific hype, telling us that the threat of global warming is now worse than ever. Then, they all gather in some agreeable venue, for the “developing” nations – led by China and India – to say they will only play ball if the “developed” world, led by the EU, the US and Japan, pays them $100 billion a year to curb their “carbon emissions”. In days of acrimony and stupefying boredom it emerges that the rich countries aren’t really intending to deliver. Finally, at the eleventh hour – or more likely 4 o’clock in the morning – a “breakthrough” is announced. Everyone has finally agreed on a meaningless document that commits no one to anything.
Christopher Booker, The Sunday Telegraph, 14 December 2014
In typical fashion, the United Nations climate summit failed to make any real headway on a global agreement to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and fight global warming. Instead, delegates from 194 countries walked away with a non-binding agreement to come back and negotiate again next year. Some environmentalists and media outlets have tried to spin the agreement reached in Lima, Peru this weekend as a big step towards a real global warming treaty, but critics argue the failed climate summit was no surprise.
Michael Bastasch, Daily Caller, 15 December 2014
Blib said:
BBC article said:
However, the Cryosat team cautions against extrapolating limited observations to predict future trends in Arctic sea ice.
Far more data is required, over a much longer period of time.
Definition of irony from the researchers. Far more data is required, over a much longer period of time.
If sea ice increases, this is an anomaly that needs more time to investigate (ideally until next summer when they can try again to claim the ice recedes, unless the ice is still a greater area at which point they will need several more years, say 20-30)...
Blib said:
This thread volume is longer than previously thought possible.......
Arbitrary original limit iirc .... but as I read you comment I had a thought.Should we consider having a new thread to accompany each UN negotiating round?
For example we might have been running with the Lima thread. There is probably a case for wrapping that up in the near future once thoughts and analysis are complete.
Meanwhile we could have a "Paris" round developing to carry everything forward in the style to which Local Climate shindigs have become accustomed.
Maybe that would be a bit excessive?
New Paper Tackles Ethical Disputes Of Climate Policy
Bishop of Chester: 'Climate policies that lack in-depth debate won't have democratic consent'
A new paper by Dr Peter Lee and published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation explores many of the ethical disputes that characterise climate science and policy in the twenty-first century. “Science has spoken. There is no ambiguity in their message… Leaders must act.” These words by Ban Ki-moon, United Nations Secretary-General, welcomed the latest IPCC Report as certain and indisputable.
But actions require choices to be made – each with economic and often overlooked ethical dimensions – and the uncertainties involved are greater than Ban Ki-moon and many of the IPCC authors publicly acknowledge.
A new paper by Dr Peter Lee and published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation explores many of the ethical disputes that characterise climate science and policy in the twenty-first century.
Dr Lee is a lecturer in Ethics and Political Theory at the University of Portsmouth and the author of Truth Wars: The Politics of Climate Change, Military Intervention and Financial Crisis (Palgrave Macmillan). Dr Lee shows that ethical considerations have arisen and continue to arise at every stage of the climate debate, from climate science to the current and future implementation of climate change mitigation and adaptation policies.
“In a field characterised by extensive uncertainty a combination of good intentions and ill-informed policies can result in damaging unintended outcomes for humans and for the natural environment alike,” Dr Lee said.
“Democratic consent to whatever is decided will not be forthcoming if the climate debate is not engaged in the depth which Dr Lee demonstrates is necessary,” writes the Rt Revd Peter Forster, the Bishop of Chester, in the foreword.
GWPF, London, 16 December 2014
Full paper (pdf): Click
Bishop of Chester: 'Climate policies that lack in-depth debate won't have democratic consent'
A new paper by Dr Peter Lee and published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation explores many of the ethical disputes that characterise climate science and policy in the twenty-first century. “Science has spoken. There is no ambiguity in their message… Leaders must act.” These words by Ban Ki-moon, United Nations Secretary-General, welcomed the latest IPCC Report as certain and indisputable.
But actions require choices to be made – each with economic and often overlooked ethical dimensions – and the uncertainties involved are greater than Ban Ki-moon and many of the IPCC authors publicly acknowledge.
A new paper by Dr Peter Lee and published today by the Global Warming Policy Foundation explores many of the ethical disputes that characterise climate science and policy in the twenty-first century.
Dr Lee is a lecturer in Ethics and Political Theory at the University of Portsmouth and the author of Truth Wars: The Politics of Climate Change, Military Intervention and Financial Crisis (Palgrave Macmillan). Dr Lee shows that ethical considerations have arisen and continue to arise at every stage of the climate debate, from climate science to the current and future implementation of climate change mitigation and adaptation policies.
“In a field characterised by extensive uncertainty a combination of good intentions and ill-informed policies can result in damaging unintended outcomes for humans and for the natural environment alike,” Dr Lee said.
“Democratic consent to whatever is decided will not be forthcoming if the climate debate is not engaged in the depth which Dr Lee demonstrates is necessary,” writes the Rt Revd Peter Forster, the Bishop of Chester, in the foreword.
GWPF, London, 16 December 2014
Full paper (pdf): Click
Electric cars not so green
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-287...
Could be upto 3.5x more polluting than petrol
Looks like the dailymail is catching up
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-287...
Could be upto 3.5x more polluting than petrol
Looks like the dailymail is catching up
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff