Climate change - the POLITICAL debate. (Vol 5)
Discussion
PRTVR said:
Capacity as reported is the problem, see above building them in secret.
Secret ?
Nice and alarmist..... almost conspiracy theory like.....
Or because the projects are state and create employment and therefore continue ?
"It comes as coal-fired power capacity additions in 2018 slowed to their lowest rate since 2004, both in China and globally, though carbon emissions from the sector continued to rise, according to the International Energy Agency.It comes as coal-fired power capacity additions in 2018 slowed to their lowest rate since 2004, both in China and globally, though carbon emissions from the sector continued to rise, according to the International Energy Agency."
WhatHappenedThere said:
"It comes as coal-fired power capacity additions in 2018 slowed to their lowest rate since 2004, both in China and globally, though carbon emissions from the sector continued to rise, according to the International Energy Agency."
Need to check the underlying figures on that one - "lowest rate" could easily mean they are still building the same number each year but this "additional" percentage reduces as the bass capacity increases. 
WhatHappenedThere said:
What a bewildering volley of cover fire just posted to obscure what TX was asked - to explain his point on the China and Big Companies statement.
Neither actually answered on his behalf either should be observed
ETA - which ‘Big Companies’ is TX meaning in the bogeyman statement.
Not many (any?) are ignoring the changes and environment demands on their businesses.
virtue signaling and token gestures are just not good enough anymore according to greta.Neither actually answered on his behalf either should be observed
ETA - which ‘Big Companies’ is TX meaning in the bogeyman statement.
Not many (any?) are ignoring the changes and environment demands on their businesses.
Edited by WhatHappenedThere on Wednesday 24th April 13:32
WhatHappenedThere said:
Secret ?
Nice and alarmist..... almost conspiracy theory like.....
Or because the projects are state and create employment and therefore continue ?
"It comes as coal-fired power capacity additions in 2018 slowed to their lowest rate since 2004, both in China and globally, though carbon emissions from the sector continued to rise, according to the International Energy Agency.It comes as coal-fired power capacity additions in 2018 slowed to their lowest rate since 2004, both in China and globally, though carbon emissions from the sector continued to rise, according to the International Energy Agency."
Clears things up ?
We are still waiting to hear back from TX on the villainous ‘Big Companies’ and his interpretation of ‘if China listens’
PRC has had s
t infrastructure for years - have you ever lived there ? I have.
They are playing catch up.
Coal infrastructure growth has slowed.
Renewables infrastructure has accelerated massively.
The statement (that for a bizarre reason you need to try and defend ) implies that China and Big Companies need to understand and react “too”.
They are.
I’m sure you’re feeling a white knight for answering / distracting the topic however.
We are still waiting to hear back from TX on the villainous ‘Big Companies’ and his interpretation of ‘if China listens’
PRC has had s
t infrastructure for years - have you ever lived there ? I have.They are playing catch up.
Coal infrastructure growth has slowed.
Renewables infrastructure has accelerated massively.
The statement (that for a bizarre reason you need to try and defend ) implies that China and Big Companies need to understand and react “too”.
They are.
I’m sure you’re feeling a white knight for answering / distracting the topic however.
WhatHappenedThere said:
Clears things up ?
We are still waiting to hear back from TX on the villainous ‘Big Companies’ and his interpretation of ‘if China listens’
PRC has had st infrastructure for years - have you ever lived there ? I have.
They are playing catch up.
Coal infrastructure growth has slowed.
Renewables infrastructure has accelerated massively.
The statement (that for a bizarre reason you need to try and defend ) implies that China and Big Companies need to understand and react “too”.
They are.
I’m sure you’re feeling a white knight for answering / distracting the topic however.
To be fair to TX - what he actually said is as below, slightly different to what you have in quotation marks above. You seem to be saying China is changing but still producing increasing amounts of CO2 albeit at a slower rate of growth - I don't think that constitutes 'sorting themselves out' ?We are still waiting to hear back from TX on the villainous ‘Big Companies’ and his interpretation of ‘if China listens’
PRC has had s
t infrastructure for years - have you ever lived there ? I have.They are playing catch up.
Coal infrastructure growth has slowed.
Renewables infrastructure has accelerated massively.
The statement (that for a bizarre reason you need to try and defend ) implies that China and Big Companies need to understand and react “too”.
They are.
I’m sure you’re feeling a white knight for answering / distracting the topic however.
In reply to the main thrust of TX's question - part b anyway (no idea on part a!) - it doesn't seem too hard just to say 'Yes - if big business and China dramatically reduced their CO2 output then climate change would slow down or stop'. That would be the mainstream science view I think?
Terminator X said:
To those with faith in the "science" (a) what level of CO2 do you think is the "correct" level and why plus (b) do you honestly believe that if we could somehow persuade Big Business + China to sort themselves out re CO2 production then climate change would simply stop and/or go back to some other "trend" presumably that you'd be happy with?
TX.
TX.
However, the generalisation inferred comes across as an undefended sweeping statement.
That also indicates that by the fact that all big business and China ARE indeed doing something about their CO2 output, demonstrates a lack of understanding- yet still allows a degree of churlish soap-boxing on this thread.
That also indicates that by the fact that all big business and China ARE indeed doing something about their CO2 output, demonstrates a lack of understanding- yet still allows a degree of churlish soap-boxing on this thread.
I see that Steve Goddard, aka Tony Hill, much loved on here is now branching out into politics. Again.
https://realclimatescience.com/2019/04/a-man-of-hi...
Apparently he takes this claim seriously, with the self indulging selfie to prove it, compared to a 400+ page report.
This is the problem with "science" websites against AGW in the USA, it's too entwined with the chaff.
Most anti AGW websites ( judged by PH links) are in the USA.
Why?
https://realclimatescience.com/2019/04/a-man-of-hi...
Apparently he takes this claim seriously, with the self indulging selfie to prove it, compared to a 400+ page report.
This is the problem with "science" websites against AGW in the USA, it's too entwined with the chaff.
Most anti AGW websites ( judged by PH links) are in the USA.
Why?
Edited by Gandahar on Thursday 25th April 23:43
WhatHappenedThere said:
However, the generalisation inferred comes across as an undefended sweeping statement.
That also indicates that by the fact that all big business and China ARE indeed doing something about their CO2 output, demonstrates a lack of understanding- yet still allows a degree of churlish soap-boxing on this thread.
A lack of understanding?That also indicates that by the fact that all big business and China ARE indeed doing something about their CO2 output, demonstrates a lack of understanding- yet still allows a degree of churlish soap-boxing on this thread.
We shut down steel and aluminium production and save CO2 production, then we import them from abroad, look at all the stuff we buy that comes from China that has to be shipped halfway round the world, this applies to all countries of the world, China's CO2 output is our output, we have just decided to outsource it.
WhatHappenedThere said:
PRTVR said:
A lack of understanding?
We shut down steel and aluminium production and save CO2 production, .
You think steel and aluminium stopped in the UK because of CO2 ?We shut down steel and aluminium production and save CO2 production, .
My point was that we haven't reduced our CO2 production we have moved it, we still consume at the same rate, so goods are needed, we don't have energy hungry factories turning out the goods but we still buy them.
PRTVR said:
WhatHappenedThere said:
PRTVR said:
A lack of understanding?
We shut down steel and aluminium production and save CO2 production, .
You think steel and aluminium stopped in the UK because of CO2 ?We shut down steel and aluminium production and save CO2 production, .
My point was that we haven't reduced our CO2 production we have moved it, we still consume at the same rate, so goods are needed, we don't have energy hungry factories turning out the goods but we still buy them.
Edited by motco on Friday 26th April 07:56
WhatHappenedThere said:
Clears things up ?
We are still waiting to hear back from TX on the villainous ‘Big Companies’ and his interpretation of ‘if China listens’
PRC has had st infrastructure for years - have you ever lived there ? I have.
They are playing catch up.
Coal infrastructure growth has slowed.
Renewables infrastructure has accelerated massively.
The statement (that for a bizarre reason you need to try and defend ) implies that China and Big Companies need to understand and react “too”.
They are.
I’m sure you’re feeling a white knight for answering / distracting the topic however.
i know exactly what they are doing, what is best for their economy. you really need to have a read of what greta and friends are proposing. there is no room for "catching up" at all.We are still waiting to hear back from TX on the villainous ‘Big Companies’ and his interpretation of ‘if China listens’
PRC has had s
t infrastructure for years - have you ever lived there ? I have.They are playing catch up.
Coal infrastructure growth has slowed.
Renewables infrastructure has accelerated massively.
The statement (that for a bizarre reason you need to try and defend ) implies that China and Big Companies need to understand and react “too”.
They are.
I’m sure you’re feeling a white knight for answering / distracting the topic however.
Climate change: Is Greta Thunberg right about UK carbon emissions?
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-480...
https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-480...
Gassing Station | News, Politics & Economics | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff