Yeah he's a fraud alright and I'm looking forward to the election, but this is the result of 100 years of industrialization and valuing the economy above all else. We can't continue to allow business (and by being customers, everyone) to externalise the costs of polluting the environment. The world needs a carbon tax or some other mechanism to offset these costs. Otherwise we'll just to pray, bit like the liberal Party does, that a technology will be developed in the future that fixes the problem.
-
IMPORTANT // Please look after your loved ones, yourself and be kind to others. If you are feeling that the world is too hard to handle there is always help - I implore you not to hesitate in contacting one of these wonderful organisations Lifeline and Beyond Blue ... and I'm sure reaching out to our PRE community we will find a way to help. T.
Global Warming
- Thread starter Disco08
- Start date
Yeah he's a fraud alright and I'm looking forward to the election, but this is the result of 100 years of industrialization and valuing the economy above all else. We can't continue to allow business (and by being customers, everyone) to externalise the costs of polluting the environment. The world needs a carbon tax or some other mechanism to offset these costs. Otherwise we'll just to pray, bit like the liberal Party does, that a technology will be developed in the future that fixes the problem.
On the money BT, I think we need to spend more money on better leaders. Morrison and Dutton not up to it for a start.
Couple this with Sydney blanketed by smog during the fires two years ago. Totally 'Natural'* disasters..
*Human Made Climate Change
*Human Made Climate Change
Attachments
Can't get flood insurance coz you're living on a flood plain. Torch the place instead, gotta be worth a pay out.
The Insurance companies would deduct premiums for 20 years on the knocker
for a special policy, protecting people who live in the zebra enclosure at the zoo from being kicked by zebras
and when they claimed they'de say,
'were the horse stripes vertical or horizontal?'
Well obviously if they were horse stripes then it's not a zebra who did the kicking n the insurance company would be lodging a police report over the fraudulent claim.
Anger at the Federal Govt response aint going away:
www.abc.net.au
'Just horrendous': Anger as residents in flooded NSW areas not eligible for disaster payments
Thousands of homes in northern NSW have been damaged by flooding, but not all residents will be eligible for extra disaster payments announced by the federal government.
www.abc.net.au
If anyone wanted an example of the libertarian world where "the market" provides support and relief for victims of disasters, here it is. No support, no help. But no doubt when people need to sell up quickly and at rock bottom prices, "the market" will be there to snap up the bargains.
Former emergency services chiefs slam govt after floods warning
Former emergency services bosses have blasted the Morrison government for failing to act on warnings before this year's deadly and devastating floods.
thenewdaily.com.au
“Last October, charity leaders met with the federal government and were warned of massive flooding this summer.”
Reckon he might be gone this time.
Former emergency services chiefs slam govt after floods warning
Former emergency services bosses have blasted the Morrison government for failing to act on warnings before this year's deadly and devastating floods.
“Last October, charity leaders met with the federal government and were warned of massive flooding this summer.”
Reckon he might be gone this time.
Sounds a lot like the former Fire chiefs trying to warn the gov that the 2019 bushfires season would be a bad one and to plan for it. At the time there was also an upcoming federal election and the libs were busy telling everyone how Labor's electric vehicle plan was going to "end the weekend".
Edit - I hadn't read it when I replied, so didn't realise that the parallels to the bushfires were already being drawn in the article.
A wealth of experience here, hope the next Government uses these people a bit more than the present seem too.
emergencyleadersforclimateaction.org.au
Who we are | Emergency Leaders for Climate Action
The Emergency Leaders for Climate Action group aim is to communicate the seriousness of the climate change threat today, and that action to tackle climate change and prepare for worsening extreme weather can save lives. The group calls for government action on emissions, and better prepared fire...
emergencyleadersforclimateaction.org.au
Yep, the science tells us that "natural" disasters such as bushfires and floods will become more common and more severe. Yet there is no planning, no response, no attempt to stop our contribution to climate change. Absolute idiocy, or just an ideology which does not want to plan, wants to leave everything to the magical markets.
But another factor I want to bring up is the notion that climate change is a function of population growth rather than a function of consumption and a fossil fuel economy. I am reading a very good book at the moment called Fossil Capital by Andreas Malm and he goes through the reasons behind the rise of fossil fuels as an energy source, but he also gives some very interesting data on population and CO2 emissions.
First, I'll just point out the bleedingly obvious - more people will lead to greater CO2 emissions in a fossil fuel economy, this is clear, 20 million people have more capacity to burn fossil fuels than 20 people. Obvious and not in dispute.
But, what has actually happened?
Here's some data:
Global emissions increased by a factor of 654.8 in the period 1820 to 2010, population over the same period increased by a factor of 6.6. Clearly population is not the driver of CO2 emissions.
If we look more recently we see that population growth and emissions are actually disconnected.
Between 1980 and 2005 the following has been observed:
China's annual population growth was 1.1%, emissions growth: 5.6%
South Korea's annual population growth was 0.9%, emission growth: 5.3%
Djibouti's annual population growth: 3.5%, emissions growth: 0.8%
Chad, population growth 3.2%, emissions growth: 1.6%
As a whole, Sub-Saharan Africa accounted for 18.5% of global population growth and 3% of global emissions growth.
Northern America accounted for 4% of global population growth, and 14% of emissions growth.
Clearly the relationship between growth in population and growth in emissions are disconnected, the driver for emissions growth is not population.
All this is also happening when Northern America has been effectively outsourcing the emissions which result from their consumption as they import a lot more consumer goods rather than making them in the country of consumption.
We can see this in the emissions from China, while emissions from China have risen, the proportion of total emissions from China which are the result of export industries has risen to around 48%. The increases in emissions from China are mainly the result of industries which export consumer goods to the west.
The reality is that it is western consumption which is driving emissions and, as Malm points out, why should Bangladesh be blamed for the emissions which result from making a T Shirt for someone in Sweden?
We really do need to change the way our economies work, otherwise we will see warming well over 2 degrees and the consequences of this are already being felt with warming at around 1.1 degrees.
DS
But another factor I want to bring up is the notion that climate change is a function of population growth rather than a function of consumption and a fossil fuel economy. I am reading a very good book at the moment called Fossil Capital by Andreas Malm and he goes through the reasons behind the rise of fossil fuels as an energy source, but he also gives some very interesting data on population and CO2 emissions.
First, I'll just point out the bleedingly obvious - more people will lead to greater CO2 emissions in a fossil fuel economy, this is clear, 20 million people have more capacity to burn fossil fuels than 20 people. Obvious and not in dispute.
But, what has actually happened?
Here's some data:
Global emissions increased by a factor of 654.8 in the period 1820 to 2010, population over the same period increased by a factor of 6.6. Clearly population is not the driver of CO2 emissions.
If we look more recently we see that population growth and emissions are actually disconnected.
Between 1980 and 2005 the following has been observed:
China's annual population growth was 1.1%, emissions growth: 5.6%
South Korea's annual population growth was 0.9%, emission growth: 5.3%
Djibouti's annual population growth: 3.5%, emissions growth: 0.8%
Chad, population growth 3.2%, emissions growth: 1.6%
As a whole, Sub-Saharan Africa accounted for 18.5% of global population growth and 3% of global emissions growth.
Northern America accounted for 4% of global population growth, and 14% of emissions growth.
Clearly the relationship between growth in population and growth in emissions are disconnected, the driver for emissions growth is not population.
All this is also happening when Northern America has been effectively outsourcing the emissions which result from their consumption as they import a lot more consumer goods rather than making them in the country of consumption.
We can see this in the emissions from China, while emissions from China have risen, the proportion of total emissions from China which are the result of export industries has risen to around 48%. The increases in emissions from China are mainly the result of industries which export consumer goods to the west.
The reality is that it is western consumption which is driving emissions and, as Malm points out, why should Bangladesh be blamed for the emissions which result from making a T Shirt for someone in Sweden?
We really do need to change the way our economies work, otherwise we will see warming well over 2 degrees and the consequences of this are already being felt with warming at around 1.1 degrees.
DS
Basically as people shift from poverty to middle class they use more energy (or else they would still be ‘poor’).
Not sure promoting inequality for climate change stirs the soul though.
I'm not promoting inequality, just pointing out what the data shows.
What we need to do is to stop this silly idea that we can grow and grow and grow our consumption on a finite planet.
For all the bluster about emissions reductions, we keep increasing emissions. Most of the emissions in China come from factories relocating to China. They do this because of cheap and readily available labour, but you also need energy and infrastructure. Plus, all those relocated factories exporting goods are contributing to warming as we move all the goods around the world.
Unless we are willing to take the risks of climate change we need to adapt to a far less consumerist society.
DS
What we need to do is to stop this silly idea that we can grow and grow and grow our consumption on a finite planet.
For all the bluster about emissions reductions, we keep increasing emissions. Most of the emissions in China come from factories relocating to China. They do this because of cheap and readily available labour, but you also need energy and infrastructure. Plus, all those relocated factories exporting goods are contributing to warming as we move all the goods around the world.
Unless we are willing to take the risks of climate change we need to adapt to a far less consumerist society.
DS
We could all go back to living in caves n chasing possums bare arsed with a pointy stick n all the worlds pollution n climate change problems would sorta disappear.
Unfortunately the two thirds of the world who don't have the luxury of all the " modern privileged society " want a share of the good stuff that we have n we also don't want to give up the good stuff we already have n go back to living in caves sittin in the dark n freezing our arses in winter.
World's simply gunna keep consumering n polluting till the *smile* hits the fan n all the posturing n protesting won't make a scrap of difference.
Unfortunately the two thirds of the world who don't have the luxury of all the " modern privileged society " want a share of the good stuff that we have n we also don't want to give up the good stuff we already have n go back to living in caves sittin in the dark n freezing our arses in winter.
World's simply gunna keep consumering n polluting till the *smile* hits the fan n all the posturing n protesting won't make a scrap of difference.
