Text only | Text with Images

THeBlueCashew

General Discussion => The Flea Trap => Topic started by: Anonymous on December 03, 2015, 05:45:54 PM

Title: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 03, 2015, 05:45:54 PM
What a waste of taxpayer dollars not to mention C02 emissions.
QuoteThe massive Canadian contingent at the UN climate-change conference in Paris was originally estimated at 350 people, but it appears the trans-Atlantic road trip has expanded.



The "provisional list of participants" just released by the UN has an amazing 383 names from Canada, ranking us among the largest entourages in the entire confab.



Don't nitpick over the newly bloated number, as it's understandable some jet-setting bureaucrats may have been initially overlooked during such a busy travel period.



If you've ever seen the classic Christmas film "Home Alone" you'll know how easy it is to get the head count wrong during a mad dash to Paris.



"Canada is back, my good friends," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the conference, and he wasn't just blowing greenhouse gases.



anada has sent more people to Paris than Australia (46), the U.K. (96), the U.S. (148), Russia (313) and almost as many as host-country France (396).



Not a bad turnout for a country that emits just 1.6 per cent of the planet's greenhouse gases, eh?



Or maybe it's not something to admire when you consider how much polluting fossil fuel was burned to fly so many hundreds of people across the ocean to talk about burning less.



Looking down the list of Canada's participants in Paris, it's hard not to conclude we're vastly over-represented.



Did we really need to send the deputy environment minister for the Northwest Territories? Theclimate-change youth ambassador for the Yukon? The leader of the New Brunswick Green Party? The interim leader of the Bloc Quebecois and his press secretary? The "security co-ordinator" for Hydro-Quebec?



Many of these fine folks are so marginal to the climate-change file that calling them "bit players" would be a stretch.



Premier Christy Clark is there, of course, though critics says she's just taking credit for someone else's work. (Former premier Gordon Campbell brought in B.C.'s groundbreaking carbon tax, which Clark promptly froze in 2012).



But while Clark has been called a laggard on the climate-change issue, she's no slouch when it comes toclimate-change photo-ops.



Clark's entourage includes her "official photographer" and her "events co-ordinator." Hey, who could save the planet without them?



Back home, meanwhile, Clark's "Climate Leadership Team" just reported that the government will fail to meet its own greenhouse-gas reduction targets and called on Clark to double the carbon taxwithin five years.



The government said it won't do that unless "emission-intensive, trade-exposed" industries are"fully protected" from any tax hikes.



That's clearly meant as a reassuring signal to the big oil-and-gas companies Clark wants to lure to B.C. to build her promised liquefied natural-gas industry.



But that's all down the road. For now, it's time for another climate-change photo-op in Paris.



Mon Dieu, I shudder to think what it's all costing taxpayers.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/smyth-canada-sent-383-people-to-the-u-n-climate-conference-more-than-australia-the-u-k-and-u-s-together
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: cc on December 03, 2015, 05:48:41 PM
QuoteCanada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together

What a two bit phony



 :laugh:  :laugh3:  ac_lmfao  ac_toofunny



:roll:











Wait Wait .. .That's on many of my two bits
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 03, 2015, 05:50:25 PM
Quote from: "cc la femme"
QuoteCanada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together

 :laugh:  :laugh3:  ac_lmfao  ac_toofunny



:roll:

Maybe it's my piss poor English, but what's so funny about all that waste?
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: cc on December 03, 2015, 05:52:52 PM
It's not your English



It's so phony / contrived / rock-stupid it IS laughable



I also added  ... "Wait Wait .. That's on many of my two bits"
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 03, 2015, 05:55:47 PM
Quote from: "cc la femme"It's not your English



It's so phony / contrived / rock-stupid it IS laughable



I also added  ... "Wait Wait .. That's on many of my two bits"

Gotcha now CC.  :smiley_thumbs_up_yellow_ani: I should've known what you meant.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: cc on December 03, 2015, 05:56:29 PM
This twat is a very expensive joke that will never stop giving .. .and taking
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 03, 2015, 05:57:24 PM
Quote from: "cc la femme"This twat is a very expensive joke that will never stop giving .. .and taking

We make it and he takes it and blows it.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: cc on December 03, 2015, 06:03:04 PM
He is so EXCEPTIONALLY / EXTREMELY   clueless, agenda-driven  and priority-messed-up, I'm figuring he may do himself in and get VERY short-termed



Especially once islamics start doing what islamics do and he has made himself be seen as promoting them he will be run out of Ottawa on a rail



Those who are happy with him are experiencing  one huge premature ejaculation
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 03, 2015, 06:18:36 PM
Quote from: "cc la femme"He is so EXCEPTIONALLY / EXTREMELY   clueless, agenda-driven  and priority-messed-up, I'm figuring he may do himself in and get VERY short-termed



Especially once islamics start doing what islamics do and he has made himself be seen as promoting them he will be run out of Ottawa on a rail



Those who are happy with him are experiencing  one huge premature ejaculation

Compared to what we have in Alberta, he's not that bad...YET!!
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 12:04:22 AM
(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-0/p600x600/12289471_1669609899972009_5768907821603804399_n.jpg?oh=fd0577f7ee0ef3042f94d9e49a7f45e6&oe=57202EF0%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hp%20...%20e=57202EF0%22%3Ehttps://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-0/p600x600/12289471_1669609899972009_5768907821603804399_n.jpg?oh=fd0577f7ee0ef3042f94d9e49a7f45e6&oe=57202EF0%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 09:08:09 AM
Quote from: "Shen Li"(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-0/p600x600/12289471_1669609899972009_5768907821603804399_n.jpg?oh=fd0577f7ee0ef3042f94d9e49a7f45e6&oe=57202EF0%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hp%20...%20e=57202EF0%22%3Ehttps://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xpa1/v/t1.0-0/p600x600/12289471_1669609899972009_5768907821603804399_n.jpg?oh=fd0577f7ee0ef3042f94d9e49a7f45e6&oe=57202EF0%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)

I wouldn't mind carbon taxes, higher electricity costs and an overall higher cost of living if it meant we were really slowing climate change, but that does not seem to be the case..



All the sacrifices we are being forced to make are in vain.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 12:23:12 PM
Quote from: "Shen Li"What a waste of taxpayer dollars not to mention C02 emissions.
QuoteThe massive Canadian contingent at the UN climate-change conference in Paris was originally estimated at 350 people, but it appears the trans-Atlantic road trip has expanded.



The "provisional list of participants" just released by the UN has an amazing 383 names from Canada, ranking us among the largest entourages in the entire confab.



Don't nitpick over the newly bloated number, as it's understandable some jet-setting bureaucrats may have been initially overlooked during such a busy travel period.



If you've ever seen the classic Christmas film "Home Alone" you'll know how easy it is to get the head count wrong during a mad dash to Paris.



"Canada is back, my good friends," Prime Minister Justin Trudeau told the conference, and he wasn't just blowing greenhouse gases.



anada has sent more people to Paris than Australia (46), the U.K. (96), the U.S. (148), Russia (313) and almost as many as host-country France (396).



Not a bad turnout for a country that emits just 1.6 per cent of the planet's greenhouse gases, eh?



Or maybe it's not something to admire when you consider how much polluting fossil fuel was burned to fly so many hundreds of people across the ocean to talk about burning less.



Looking down the list of Canada's participants in Paris, it's hard not to conclude we're vastly over-represented.



Did we really need to send the deputy environment minister for the Northwest Territories? Theclimate-change youth ambassador for the Yukon? The leader of the New Brunswick Green Party? The interim leader of the Bloc Quebecois and his press secretary? The "security co-ordinator" for Hydro-Quebec?



Many of these fine folks are so marginal to the climate-change file that calling them "bit players" would be a stretch.



Premier Christy Clark is there, of course, though critics says she's just taking credit for someone else's work. (Former premier Gordon Campbell brought in B.C.'s groundbreaking carbon tax, which Clark promptly froze in 2012).



But while Clark has been called a laggard on the climate-change issue, she's no slouch when it comes toclimate-change photo-ops.



Clark's entourage includes her "official photographer" and her "events co-ordinator." Hey, who could save the planet without them?



Back home, meanwhile, Clark's "Climate Leadership Team" just reported that the government will fail to meet its own greenhouse-gas reduction targets and called on Clark to double the carbon taxwithin five years.



The government said it won't do that unless "emission-intensive, trade-exposed" industries are"fully protected" from any tax hikes.



That's clearly meant as a reassuring signal to the big oil-and-gas companies Clark wants to lure to B.C. to build her promised liquefied natural-gas industry.



But that's all down the road. For now, it's time for another climate-change photo-op in Paris.



Mon Dieu, I shudder to think what it's all costing taxpayers.

http://news.nationalpost.com/news/canada/canadian-politics/smyth-canada-sent-383-people-to-the-u-n-climate-conference-more-than-australia-the-u-k-and-u-s-together

If climate change is caused by man and the challenge of our generation, whey are the people that are scaring us to death about making it worse with these useless international parties? The premier of BC brought her personal photographer. Could she not have brought her camera and a selfie stick. It's getting so hard to listen to politicians when the topic is climate change.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Romero on December 04, 2015, 03:36:47 PM
QuoteThe Downward Spiral Of Chinese Coal Use



Contrary to the claim by some that China's pledge doesn't require the country to take action to cut carbon pollution for 15 years, China is now adopting a broad spectrum of policies to slash coal use — including a cap-and-trade system that will put a price on carbon. A key motivation for China, beyond simply its interest in slowing climate change, is that its urban air pollution levels are among the highest in the world. This gives the country a major public health and domestic political motivation to slash coal use.



"In 2014, Beijing shut down more than 1,000 coal mines," Melanie Hart, Director of China Policy at CAP, explains in her new report. Regionally "Beijing is rolling out fast-track provincial- and municipal-level coal-control and emission-reduction policies that are putting some Chinese provinces and cities on a path to peak emissions as early as 2020 or 2022."



(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/03112350/ChinaCoalPeak1.jpg%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content%20...%20lPeak1.jpg%22%3Ehttp://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/03112350/ChinaCoalPeak1.jpg%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)



(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/03123047/ChinaRenewables1.jpg%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22http://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content%20...%20ables1.jpg%22%3Ehttp://cdn.thinkprogress.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/12/03123047/ChinaRenewables1.jpg%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)



//http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/12/04/3727779/downward-spiral-chinese-coal/
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 04:25:11 PM
So thinkprogress is saying China is weaning itself off of coal? China's thirst for power is waning, but they continue building coal fired power plants at an astonishing rate. Other forms of energy are the loser.



http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/12/world/asia/china-coal-power-energy-policy.html?_r=0

China's state-controlled economy creates strong incentives for provinces to manage their own energy sources to generate jobs and revenue. Coal plants have long been the easiest, fastest way for provinces to meet their own energy needs and stimulate local economic growth.



That system has created what appears to be a disconnect between the provincial building boom and the country's overall energy requirements, making it harder for China to convert to a system that is not dominated by dirty fuel.



"China already has more coal capacity than it will ever need," Zhang Boting, vice chairman of the China Society for Hydropower Engineering, said in an interview. "A few years down the road, we'll see what a waste the plants are. We have seen this happen to the steel and cement industries."







In the first nine months of this year, state-owned companies received preliminary or full approval to build the 155 coal power plants that have a total capacity of 123 gigawatts, the report said. That capacity is equal to 15 percent of China's coal-fired power capacity at the end of 2014.



The construction boom — with capital costs estimated by Greenpeace at $74 billion — is a clear sign that China remains entrenched in investment-driven growth, despite promises by leaders to transform the economic model to one based on consumer spending.



It also raises questions about whether China is weaning itself from coal as quickly as it can



Utility contracts guarantee that coal-fired plants operate a minimum number of hours to sell power to the grid, while renewable sources have no such guarantee. Wind power capacity has been growing in China, but so has the amount of wasted wind power, called curtailment, according to National Energy Administration statistics. In the first half of 2015, the rate of curtailment was 15 percent, almost twice that of the same period in 2014.



Mr. Zhang said the dominance of coal power had led to "a sharp decline in investments in renewable energy."

(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22http://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2015/11/03/chinacoal/c879b3614acfaaeafae4d871d280d9d9608cfe6f/chinacoal-Artboard_1.png%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22http://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphi%20...%20oard_1.png%22%3Ehttp://graphics8.nytimes.com/newsgraphics/2015/11/03/chinacoal/c879b3614acfaaeafae4d871d280d9d9608cfe6f/chinacoal-Artboard_1.png%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Renee on December 04, 2015, 06:14:16 PM
Once again, the far left "news" sources of the Prog Prince get shot down. :laugh3:
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 06:23:28 PM
Quote from: "Renee"Once again, the far left "news" sources of the Prog Prince get shot down. :laugh3:

I am surprised Romero did not take a look at some real news sources and see that China's use of coal electricity is growing.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Romero on December 04, 2015, 06:25:14 PM
Quote from: "seoulbro"So thinkprogress is saying China is weaning itself off of coal? China's thirst for power is waning, but they continue building coal fired power plants at an astonishing rate. Other forms of energy are the loser.

China is building cleaner, efficient coal plants but closing all the dirtier ones.



We'll see! China can't be depending on coal so much forever. Citizens are getting fed up with all the pollution.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Romero on December 04, 2015, 06:28:32 PM
Quote from: "seoulbro"I am surprised Romero did not take a look at some real news sources and see that China's use of coal electricity is growing.

The article's info is based on a study by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.



//http://www.mining.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/IEEFA_Peak-Coal_November-2015.pdf
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: cc on December 04, 2015, 07:02:54 PM
QuoteCanada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together


 :laugh:  ac_lmfao  ac_toofunny  :laugh3:



:roll:



Sorry. Can't stop laffin @ the stupidity of the Jay Vee team many of our twits elected
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 08:41:52 PM
We have coal power in Alberta for now, but we don't have the air pollution that China does..



When we lived in Kazakhstan, the air quality was terrible and they use coal..



Australia uses coal and their air quality is acceptable, so air problems have more to do with engineering standards and not simply using coal.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 11:03:30 PM
Good on Rudy for calling out these idiotic assholes trying to feed us the climate change causes Islamofascism Kool Aid.
QuoteFormer New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, in an appearance on "Your World With Neil Cavuto" on Tuesday, disputed the president's assertion that climate change is linked to terrorism, noting that many of the terrorists are middle class or rich, so it's not the result of desperation.



"The terrorism that we're dealing with is not emerging from desperation. Many of these people are middle class or rich people who are involved in the terrorism. This is an ideologically or religiously based – and I would say certainly a misinterpretation of the religion and a, or if you want to call it a hijacking of the religion – but the religion has been turned into an ideology. It's like saying communism was caused by climate change," he said.

http://cnsnews.com/news/article/melanie-hunter/rudy-giuliani-linking-climate-change-terrorism-saying-communism-was
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 04, 2015, 11:58:09 PM
(//%3C/s%3E%3CURL%20url=%22https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/12246972_10153466429938801_3720539519038959912_n.jpg?oh=0c7389e0c803859472e63c170d1abf63&oe=5721D8A8%22%3E%3CLINK_TEXT%20text=%22https://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hp%20...%20e=5721D8A8%22%3Ehttps://scontent-sea1-1.xx.fbcdn.net/hphotos-xap1/v/t1.0-9/12246972_10153466429938801_3720539519038959912_n.jpg?oh=0c7389e0c803859472e63c170d1abf63&oe=5721D8A8%3C/LINK_TEXT%3E%3C/URL%3E%3Ce%3E)
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 05, 2015, 11:51:18 AM
Quote from: "Romero"
Quote from: "seoulbro"I am surprised Romero did not take a look at some real news sources and see that China's use of coal electricity is growing.

The article's info is based on a study by the Institute for Energy Economics and Financial Analysis.



//http://www.mining.com/wp-content/uploads/2015/11/IEEFA_Peak-Coal_November-2015.pdf

The problem with a non news source like thinkprogress is they give half truths. They are implying that wind and solar is winning out against coal and of course that is not the case.

China Burns Much More Coal Than Reported, Complicating Climate Talks

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/11/04/world/asia/china-burns-much-more-coal-than-reported-complicating-climate-talks.html?_r=0
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 05, 2015, 12:07:24 PM
We have been talking about coal consumption in China, but what is at least as serious if not more is the rare earth mining in China and the environmental wreckage it has caused. It's not that burning coal or mining rare earth metals in theory are disastrous, but like most large scale industrial projects in China, safety and environment are not priorities.



In China, the true cost of Britain's clean, green wind power experiment: Pollution on a disastrous scale

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/moslive/article-1350811/In-China-true-cost-Britains-clean-green-wind-power-experiment-Pollution-disastrous-scale.html#ixzz3tT1621sQ



Rare earth mining in China: the bleak social and environmental costs

http://www.theguardian.com/sustainable-business/rare-earth-mining-china-social-environmental-costs
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 05, 2015, 12:17:34 PM
While I do believe the climate is changing and human activity is likely a contributing factor, I do not believe there is much we can do to stop the cycle even if we reduce our emissions to zero which is impossible anyway.



http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/climate-change-will-not-be-dangerous-for-a-long-time/

Climate Change Will Not Be Dangerous for a Long Time

The climate change debate has been polarized into a simple dichotomy. Either global warming is "real, man-made and dangerous," as Pres. Barack Obama thinks, or it's a "hoax," as Oklahoma Sen. James Inhofe thinks. But there is a third possibility: that it is real, man-made and not dangerous, at least not for a long time.



This "lukewarm" option has been boosted by recent climate research, and if it is right, current policies may do more harm than good. For example, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations and other bodies agree that the rush to grow biofuels, justified as a decarbonization measure, has raised food prices and contributed to rainforest destruction. Since 2013 aid agencies such as the U.S. Overseas Private Investment Corporation, the World Bank and the European Investment Bank have restricted funding for building fossil-fuel plants in Asia and Africa; that has slowed progress in bringing electricity to the one billion people who live without it and the four million who die each year from the effects of cooking over wood fires.



In 1990 the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was predicting that if emissions rose in a "business as usual" way, which they have done, then global average temperature would rise at the rate of about 0.3 degree Celsius per decade (with an uncertainty range of 0.2 to 0.5 degree C per decade). In the 25 years since, temperature has risen at about 0.1 to 0.2 degree C per decade, depending on whether surface or satellite data is used. The IPCC, in its most recent assessment report, lowered its near-term forecast for the global mean surface temperature over the period 2016 to 2035 to just 0.3 to 0.7 degree C above the 1986–2005 level. That is a warming of 0.1 to 0.2 degree C per decade, in all scenarios, including the high-emissions ones.



At the same time, new studies of climate sensitivity—the amount of warming expected for a doubling of carbon dioxide levels from 0.03 to 0.06 percent in the atmosphere—have suggested that most models are too sensitive. The average sensitivity of the 108 model runs considered by the IPCC is 3.2 degrees C. As Pat Michaels, a climatologist and self-described global warming skeptic at the Cato Institute testified to Congress in July, certain studies of sensitivity published since 2011 find an average sensitivity of 2 degrees C.



Such lower sensitivity does not contradict greenhouse-effect physics. The theory of dangerous climate change is based not just on carbon dioxide warming but on positive and negative feedback effects from water vapor and phenomena such as clouds and airborne aerosols from coal burning. Doubling carbon dioxide levels, alone, should produce just over 1 degree C of warming. These feedback effects have been poorly estimated, and almost certainly overestimated, in the models.



SEE ALSO:

Health: All Gene-Editing Research Should Proceed Cautiously, Scientists Conclude | Mind: Using Pigeons to Diagnosis Cancer | Tech: "Improving" Humans with Customized Genes Sparks Debate among Scientists | The Sciences: New Law Paves the Way for Asteroid Mining--but Will It Work?

The last IPCC report also included a table debunking many worries about "tipping points" to abrupt climate change. For example, it says a sudden methane release from the ocean, or a slowdown of the Gulf Stream, are "very unlikely" and that a collapse of the West Antarctic or Greenland ice sheets during this century is "exceptionally unlikely."



If sensitivity is low and climate change continues at the same rate as it has over the past 50 years, then dangerous warming—usually defined as starting at 2 degrees C above preindustrial levels—is about a century away. So we do not need to rush into subsidizing inefficient and land-hungry technologies, such as wind and solar or risk depriving poor people access to the beneficial effects of cheap electricity via fossil fuels.



As the upcoming Paris climate conference shows, the world is awash with plans, promises and policies to tackle climate change. But they are having little effect. Ten years ago the world derived 87 percent of its primary energy from fossil fuels; today, according the widely respected BP statistical review of world energy, the figure is still 87 percent. The decline in nuclear power has been matched by the rise in renewables but the proportion coming from wind and solar is still only 1 percent.



Getting the price of low-carbon energy much lower will do the trick. So we should spend the coming decades stepping up research and development of new energy technologies. Many people may reply that we don't have time to wait for that to bear fruit, but given the latest lukewarm science of climate change, I think we probably do.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: J0E on December 05, 2015, 09:01:24 PM
Of those not mentioned, is our useless mayor and his equally useless Vision council, Gregor Robertson.



I welcome any of you living in other Canadian cities to take him off our hands.



Robertson is costing the taxpayers of Vancouver plenty, and he's getting absolutely nothing done.



http://blogs.theprovince.com/2015/12/02/gordon-clark-who-is-our-hobnobbing-mayor-actually-serving/


QuoteIn 2010, Canada's then-top spy Richard Fadden gave a rare interview to CBC host Peter Mansbridge in which he warned that "several municipal politicians in British Columbia ..." were "under at least the general influence of a foreign government."



Apart from China, I have no idea which countries or politicians Fadden was talking about. But if it doesn't include Vancouver Mayor Gregor Robertson and other members of his fake municipal party of activists, perhaps CSIS should give some thought to looking into them, given their dubious and disturbing behaviour and deep connections to U.S. "foreign" interests.



We learned this week that Vision politicians and taxpayer-funded political staff and municipal bureaucrats are at the climate meetings in Paris, thanks in part to cash they were given by C40, an organization of world cities led, for now, by green politicians "committed to addressing climate change."



Robertson is attending four C40 events while in Paris, where he and his friends will drink more green Kool-Aid from Bloomberg and his C40 pals, including the notion that mayors should solve climate change with what one political scientist, Harald Fuhr of Potsdam University, called "elitist policy-making," since national governments have so far failed.



Robertson either doesn't understand that politicians shouldn't accept gifts from those pushing a particular public policy, especially when they stand to profit from public funding, or he's so arrogant he thinks the rules don't apply to him because he's "saving" the planet.



I'm concerned about another problem with Robertson's behaviour. When he jets off, as he frequently does, to participate in these international climate blabfests that are far outside his mandate as a mayor, is he acting for Vancouver taxpayers or is he an agent of people like Bloomberg, inflicting their useless and expensive policies on Vancouver taxpayers? Or is he lining up a lucrative green career option for when he's done being mayor in two years?



In Vancouver, after seven years of Vision rule, homelessness is worse than ever, traffic congestion is at an all-time high, in part thanks to their street-restricting policies, no one can afford a decent home and neighbourhoods are being ruined by Vision's push to increase density while ignoring what citizens want.



I'm sure Robertson enjoys sipping champagne with his girlfriend in Paris and hobnobbing with his rich pals, but he's not doing his job as Vancouver's mayor while doing it. If you look around the city, it shows.


The residents of Vancouver are sick of Mayor Gregor Robertson.



Edmonton, Calgary, if you don't mind, you can take him and Vision Vancouver off our hands so you can put them on your civic welfare payrolls.



You can have 'em we don' want 'em.


Quote from: "Shen Li"What a waste of taxpayer dollars not to mention C02 emissions.



Canada has sent more people to Paris than Australia (46), the U.K. (96), the U.S. (148), Russia (313) and almost as many as host-country France (396).



Not a bad turnout for a country that emits just 1.6 per cent of the planet's greenhouse gases, eh?



Mon Dieu, I shudder to think what it's all costing taxpayers.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 06, 2015, 04:51:22 PM
I don't read too much about the city council in Vancouver. When I do, it's usually how they are leaders in climate change which usually means charging people more for symbolism.
Title: Re: Canada Sent More "Participants" To Paris Climate Talks Than Australia, the U.K. And U.S. Together
Post by: Anonymous on December 07, 2015, 12:36:03 PM
The climate change hysteria continues.



The world's temperature has risen approximately one half of a centigrade degree, or almost one fahrenheit degree, in 35 years. There has been minimal global warming for 18 years, though carbon emissions in the world have steadily increased throughout that period. It is indisputable that the world has been warmer several times in its history than it is now, so whatever impact man may have on it, the world's temperature is evidently subject to fluctuations for other reasons. There is also legitimate disagreement about the consequences of such warming as might occur. Recent research at the University of Sussex, widely recognized for its expertise in this field, indicates that warming up to 3.5 centigrade degrees from where we are now would have no appreciable impact on anything, except a positive impact where increased volumes of carbon dioxide increase arable area and make crops more drought-resistant. There has also been a good deal of reciprocally corroborating research in different countries by recognized experts that uniformly demonstrates that the world's temperature is much less sensitive than had long been feared to increased carbon use. Antarctic polar ice is thickening and world water levels are not rising. Apocalyptic statements of imminent consequences of not reducing carbon use have been fairly thoroughly debunked.

http://news.nationalpost.com/full-comment/conrad-black-the-great-climate-conference-charade-playing-out-in-paris
Text only | Text with Images