Cont: Global warming discussion V

[Aridas]

No, the Democratic Party doesn't try "to work for everyone and lift everyone up"

<snipped for space reasons>

But maybe you think that it's a wonderful argument for establishment Democrats that they are less in Big Oil's pocket than their GOP competition.
And the USA still calls itself a democracy! Go figure!

At this point, I may as well repeat an earlier observation.

The argument being offered is, in short, that there's more to the story than just that and that you are consistently refusing to so much as acknowledge that, creating a very distorted picture. Everything that you've been posting is confirming the correctness of that argument.

I think that I may as well just roll my eyes at you and move on, because, in short, you're just being combative and happily resorting to various fallacies as you attack straw men. My actual point's been made, supported, and you have given good reason to agree, no less, yet you're stuck in combat mode. Is it your intent to be unreasonable and drive more emotionally driven people away from your professed cause? Your choices continue to suggest that your actual interest is notably different than what you claim. If this is not actually your intent, perhaps taking a step back and putting a little consideration into what you say instead of lashing out like a child might serve you well.

 

[Stout]

As for Stout's usual, 'But people want oil and gas!', there's this:

Ah yes, the easy part. Tick a few boxes on a survey, pat yourself on the back for a job well done then mutter something about Big Oil before boarding your flight to Bali. You know if I could fly 13 000km over an ocean on an electric plane, I'd totally do it. In fact I'd even pay a slightly elevated ticket price to help save the planet but in the meantime, sorry planet, not my fault, I have to do this, that advertising is too juicy to give up and that article about the lifestyle benefits of travel really hit home.

Meanwhile, CO2 emissions continue to rise...

 

[dann]

The Silent Majority: 89% of us want global climate action (CuriousEarth, May 14, 2025)
Recently, it has seemed at times like the tide is turning against climate action. Media attention has homed in on the costs of decarbonisation and reaching net zero. In the US, key climate policies have been scrapped, and in the UK, the Guardian reported that Reform UK, after winning a local seat, vowed to block renewable energy projects entirely.
Yet, the voice of the people paints a different picture. The 89 Percent Project surveyed over 130,000 people in 125 countries worldwide, and found that the majority want more to be done, not less.And according to the Climate Barometer, a UK think tank, 72% of the UK public supports new onshore wind and solar farms.
What’s more, this isn’t just passive support; the majority are willing to personally financially contribute. In fact, the 89 Percent Project has revealed that 69% of people globally are willing to donate 1% of their income to climate action, yet only 43% believe others would do the same.
This gap between perception and reality suggests a simple yet powerful solution: talk about it. Conversations at work, at the pub or over the garden fence can help us realise that we’re not alone. We are, in fact, the majority.

More accurately, the Democratic Party tries to work for everyone and lift everyone up.

One of the problems is that the Democratic Party is more concerned with 'lifting up' imaginary people, i.e. 'the Baileys', than 'lifting up' actual, real live people.

You can't get more establishment Democrat that Chuck Schumer, who "has led the Senate Democratic Caucus since 2017 and served as Senate majority leader from 2021 to 2025." (Wikipedia)

Excerpts From Sen. Schumer's Book Positively American: Our Energy Policy Can Not Be Sustained... (HuffPost, Mar 28, 2008)
They had heard about global warming; whether true or not, it didn't seem like a pressing problem. Conservation was a nice idea--for celebrities. None of it had a whole lot to do with them.
(...)
The weather has gotten weird. It's hard to know what's next, but it's all too likely that whatever it is will affect Joe and Eileen.
Foreign (!) oil's effects on national security and global warming are in the public's consciousness like never before. Today, many believe that we might never have gone into Iraq if not for foreign oil. Many wonder if Hurricane Katrina might never have happened if not for the global warming caused by burning oil. Issues that are less immediate are part of a story that the Baileys now care about.

So I guess it's supposed to be good that Biden and Harris replaced that dirty foreign oil with domestic oil and gas.
And Schumer doesn't think that Big Oil will pay senators for nudging people to buy energy-efficient cars.

Chuck Schumer's imaginary friends (TheNewYorker 100/OccupySF, Mar 12, 2007)
Liberal élitism, [Chuck Schumer] said, as he stirred Sweet ’N Low into his tea with a chopstick, alienates middle-income families from the Party. “Middle-class people don’t think everybody should have to drive a tiny little car to achieve improvement in global warming,” he said. Invoking opponents of expanding the tuition tax credit to the middle class, he went on, “If we listened to the New York Times editorial board, we’d have twenty-one votes in the Senate.”

 

[dann]

Ah yes, the easy part. Tick a few boxes on a survey, pat yourself on the back for a job well done then mutter something about Big Oil before boarding your flight to Bali. You know if I could fly 13 000km over an ocean on an electric plane, I'd totally do it. In fact I'd even pay a slightly elevated ticket price to help save the planet but in the meantime, sorry planet, not my fault, I have to do this, that advertising is too juicy to give up and that article about the lifestyle benefits of travel really hit home.

Meanwhile, CO2 emissions continue to rise...

Ah yes, the easiest part of all!
Instead of referring to reality - in this case in the form of a survey - repeat your cock-and-bull story about how imaginary people think.
As we all know, that's what every consumer living paycheck to paycheck does: boarding flights to Bali!
And while Stout is busy making up his tall tales, "CO2 emissions continue to rise..." allegedly because those damn 89%ers are boarding flights to Bali.

 

[dann]

At this point, I may as well repeat an earlier observation.

I think that I may as well just roll my eyes at you and move on, because, in short, you're just being combative and happily resorting to various fallacies as you attack straw men. My actual point's been made, supported, and you have given good reason to agree, no less, yet you're stuck in combat mode. Is it your intent to be unreasonable and drive more emotionally driven people away from your professed cause? Your choices continue to suggest that your actual interest is notably different than what you claim. If this is not actually your intent, perhaps taking a step back and putting a little consideration into what you say instead of lashing out like a child might serve you well.

Roll your eyes as much as you please!
I have supplied you with example after example of what Democratic presidents, vice presidents and other establishment Democrats say and do, and all you have done is present what you call observations, supported by no documentation whatsoever.
Perhaps taking a step back and looking at the reality of what the Democratic Party has actually been doing - and who has been paying those Democratic politicians to do it - would be an idea at this point.
Your childish belief that you are right doesn't make your 'observations' true, which appears to be a difficult concept to handle.

 

[dann]

Gulf Stream collapse could start by 2060, Dutch researchers warn

The Gulf Stream, a system of ocean currents that plays a crucial role in the climate, may reach an irreversible point of collapse much sooner than previously thought. Previously, scientists thought the point of no return for the Gulf Stream would happen after 2100.

nltimes.nl

This will dramatically cool Europe and North America while further heating the Southern Hemisphere.

2060 is much later than other predictions:

Gulf Stream could collapse as early as 2025, study suggests

A collapse would bring catastrophic climate impacts but scientists disagree over the new analysis

www.theguardian.com

 

[Stout]

Ah yes, the easiest part of all!
Instead of referring to reality - in this case in the form of a survey - repeat your cock-and-bull story about how imaginary people think.
As we all know, that's what every consumer living paycheck to paycheck does: boarding flights to Bali!
And while Stout is busy making up his tall tales, "CO2 emissions continue to rise..." allegedly because those damn 89%ers are boarding flights to Bali.

You do know your referenced survey is crap, don't you? So what if a bunch of people in developing nations are wanting something done about climate change it's the developed nations that are producing the emissions (generally) and they haven't gotten past the whinging about "somebody should do something" phase. Yea, that's it. Somebody should do something as long as it doesn't negatively impact my lifestyle.

I've been paying carbon taxes for years, so my 1% is looked after yet...emissions are still rising.

Here's the study.

Globally representative evidence on the actual and perceived support for climate action - Nature Climate Change

Global support and cooperation are necessary for successful climate action. Large-scale representative survey results show that most of the population around the world is willing to support climate action, while a perception gap exists regarding other citizens’ intention to act.

www.nature.com

 

[Aridas]

Roll your eyes as much as you please!

I will!

I have supplied you with example after example of what Democratic presidents, vice presidents and other establishment Democrats say and do, and all you have done is present what you call observations, supported by no documentation whatsoever.
Perhaps taking a step back and looking at the reality of what the Democratic Party has actually been doing - and who has been paying those Democratic politicians to do it - would be an idea at this point.
Your childish belief that you are right doesn't make your 'observations' true, which appears to be a difficult concept to handle.

Mmm. This might have more of an impact if you showed actual understanding of what I've been saying, throughout. I've been pretty clear, frankly. That you are either unwilling or unable to do so is, perhaps, the most serious problem at hand.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

Ah yes, the easy part. Tick a few boxes on a survey, pat yourself on the back for a job well done then mutter something about Big Oil before boarding your flight to Bali. You know if I could fly 13 000km over an ocean on an electric plane, I'd totally do it. In fact I'd even pay a slightly elevated ticket price to help save the planet but in the meantime, sorry planet, not my fault, I have to do this, that advertising is too juicy to give up and that article about the lifestyle benefits of travel really hit home.

Meanwhile, CO2 emissions continue to rise...

CO2 emissions in most western countries are falling. Per capita emissions in the US peaked in 2000, dropping 30% by 2023. In the same period UK emissions per person dropped 53%. China and India are the big outliers, but China's total emissions peaked this year. Their aggressive shift to renewables is paying off.

Last month my brother traveled by plane to California and back, a distance of 22,000 km. Does it upset me? Not at all. This is the first and only overseas flight he has taken in 65 years, and will probably be his last too. Passenger air travel only accounts for ~2% of global GHG emissions. The gas car he drives is a different matter though. Multiplied by ~1.4 billion cars on the road globaly the total emissions are staggering - yet most people still resist switching to an EV because it might inconvenience them. But even that is changing now as the technology improves.

As renewables take over CO₂ emissions will fall, first slowly and then more rapidly until we get close to net zero. This may start to become apparent as early as next year. Air travel's contribution is low enough that we don't have to worry about it for now. The problem may largely solve itself anyway as the global recession starts to bite. That trip to Bali will be one of the first things to go (and if you had any sense you already bought an EV to save on fuel bills, like I did in 2019).

 

[dann]

You do know your referenced survey is crap, don't you? So what if a bunch of people in developing nations are wanting something done about climate change it's the developed nations that are producing the emissions (generally) and they haven't gotten past the whinging about "somebody should do something" phase. Yea, that's it. Somebody should do something as long as it doesn't negatively impact my lifestyle.

I've been paying carbon taxes for years, so my 1% is looked after yet...emissions are still rising.
Here's the study.

Globally representative evidence on the actual and perceived support for climate action - Nature Climate Change

Global support and cooperation are necessary for successful climate action. Large-scale representative survey results show that most of the population around the world is willing to support climate action, while a perception gap exists regarding other citizens’ intention to act.

www.nature.com

Amazing! Stout bases his idea that people are content with things as they are and don't want change on a study that says this:

Globally representative evidence on the actual and perceived support for climate action (Nature, Feb 9, 2024)
Abstract
Mitigating climate change necessitates global cooperation, yet global data on individuals’ willingness to act remain scarce. In this study, we conducted a representative survey across 125 countries, interviewing nearly 130,000 individuals. Our findings reveal widespread support for climate action. Notably, 69% of the global population expresses a willingness to contribute 1% of their personal income, 86% endorse pro-climate social norms and 89% demand intensified political action. Countries facing heightened vulnerability to climate change show a particularly high willingness to contribute. Despite these encouraging statistics, we document that the world is in a state of pluralistic ignorance, wherein individuals around the globe systematically underestimate the willingness of their fellow citizens to act. This perception gap, combined with individuals showing conditionally cooperative behaviour, poses challenges to further climate action. Therefore, raising awareness about the broad global support for climate action becomes critically important in promoting a unified response to climate change.

Stout pretends to know all about people's way of thinking based on that study. He is indeed "in a state of pluralistic ignorance, wherein individuals around the globe systematically underestimate the willingness of their fellow citizens to act."
It is as right on the money as if they had just read Stout's posts, which consistently underestimating the willingness of his fellow citizens to act.

And since "raising awareness about the broad global support for climate action becomes critically important," let's move on to this:

 

[dann]

Experts Drop BOMBSHELL On Massive Summer Change As Upcoming Crisis Revealed (The Damage Report on YouTube, Sep 2, 2025 - 5:55 min.)
Experts in weather analysis and the Washington Post put together a bombshell analysis on the summer season, soon overtaking the fall completely with most areas experiencing summer nearly a month longer now and growing, while ocean heat containment is soon to make it worse. John Iadarola and Jayar Jackson break it down on The Damage Report.

The root of the prolonged summer heat is the overall increase in global temperatures. The recent increase in greenhouse gas emissions, through the burning of fossil fuels, traps heat in our atmosphere and raises our average global temperature. The past ten years have been the hottest on record.

In Denmark, I actually find our prolonged summers quite pleasant. If it weren't for the effect that it will have long-term, I'd like them to continue like this. Other people benefit from this, too: Danish wine (Wikipedia)

 

[dann]

CO2 emissions in most western countries are falling. Per capita emissions in the US peaked in 2000, dropping 30% by 2023. In the same period UK emissions per person dropped 53%. China and India are the big outliers, but China's total emissions peaked this year. Their aggressive shift to renewables is paying off.

It remains to be seen if China's emissions actually peaked this year, but it is also worth noticing how they compare to the USA, Canada and Australia.
India isn't really much of an outlier. Indian emissions may be rising, but ...
CO₂ emissions per capita

ETA: I have added "World" to the graph: CO₂ emissions per capita.
is the only one of the countries from the previous graph to be far below the world average. is now close to the world average (slightly below, actually) after centuries of being one of the worst CO₂ emitters. The rest of them are above; far above.

 

[Roger Ramjets]

I have added "World" to the graph: CO₂ emissions per capita.
is the only one of the countries from the previous graph to be far below the world average. is now close to the world average (slightly below, actually) after centuries of being one of the worst CO₂ emitters. The rest of them are above; far above.

Where they are relative to the average isn't important, the trend is what matters. If you look at total emissions China is by far the worst, which is why what they do is so important. Provided the west also continues to tamp it down we will be OK (not great, but 'OK').

 

[dann]

I'm sorry, but I don't look at total emissions per country, which is what MAGA fans tend to do for very obvious reasons.
It is an utterly absurd way of looking at emissions. For instance, 's total emissions are negligible - because of the size of 's population.

What does is important because the country is not only actively trying - and recently apparently managing - to lower CO₂ emissions in not only itself but also in the countries of its trading partners and allies.
I wonder what Puerto Ricans will think if 's problems with electricity are solved before 's.


And still emit almost twice as much CO₂ per capita as China.

I love the people who whine about 's rising CO₂ emissions when they are still far below the level of the world average.

Here are several graphs of countries based on different CO₂ parameters:
Per capita, national, historical: how do countries compare on CO2 metrics?
For instance, Share of global cumulative CO₂ emissions
is responsible for more than 20% of the world's CO₂ emissions - with less than 5% of the world's population.

 

[dann]

Cheyenne to host massive AI data center using more electricity than all Wyoming homes combined (AP, July 29, 2025)
CHEYENNE, Wyo. (AP) — An artificial intelligence data center that would use more electricity than every home in Wyoming combined before expanding to as much as five times that size will be built soon near Cheyenne, according to the city’s mayor.
(...)
A top producer of coal, oil and gas, Wyoming ranks behind only Texas, New Mexico and Pennsylvania as a top net energy-producing state.
(...)
“This is exciting news for Wyoming and for Wyoming natural gas producers,” Gordon said in the statement.

But if you happen to live in Wyoming, there is no reason to worry about those hot showers you prefer, because what you should worry about is getting any showers at all:

AI Is Draining Water from Areas That Need It Most (Bloomberg, May 8, 2025)
The data centers that power artificial intelligence consume immense amounts of water to cool hot servers and, indirectly, from the electricity needed to run these facilities.

 

[dann]

Electricity is About to be Like Housing (Hank Green on YouTube, Sep 4, 2025 - 15:59 min.)

1:28--> We don't want electricity prices to be another thing that we have to think about. But we have just entered into a world where that is definitely the case. And I can tell you that's the case because of this graph, which is just the stock price of an energy company. In January of 2024, this stock was worth $38 per share. It is now, as of today, worth $208 a share.
So, why do we think that this stock is going to be so valuable? It hasn't changed that much. It's because everybody expects them to make a ton of profit. Why? Because demand for electricity is going to come up, but supply is being intentionally, artificially constrained. And then you have to ask, Who exactly benefits from this? Because it's not very many people. You just slow down the entire economy when electricity prices go way up. It's obviously bad for people and it's also obviously bad for whoever gets blamed for it.
So what the heck is going on here? Why is this happening? Why is supply being artificially constrained? And what does that tell us about the people who think that they're going to benefit from this? First though, we have to talk about demand. So, we all know that demand for electricity is increasing. The biggest reason being adding a bunch of data centers to turn electricity and intellectual property into large language models and other artificial intelligence systems that will theoretically fix everything I guess. Whatever. We know that there are a ton of data centers being built, that they're all going to come online, that they're going to use a tremendous amount of electricity to do all the stuff they need to do to turn electricity into value for their shareholders. And it's going to be like one of the first new electricity sectors. I mean, it already is like the first new electricity sector that's been added in a very long time. And it's going to be a massive consumer of electricity. That's everybody's projection. That's what everybody thinks is going to happen.

At 6:40, there's a graph of Net Generation of Electricity from All Sectors, 2001-2023. It can also be found here:
U.S. Net Generation of Electricity Relied on Record Use of Renewables while Coal Use Dropped to a Record Low in 2023 (Energy.gov, Oct 21, 2024)
It is a good illustration of how little "other renewables" (than hydroelectric, i.e. wind, geothermal, biomass, and solar) have grown in the USA unlike e.g. the EU - in spite of Biden's "We’re America. We can do both."
Natural gas has tripled - to make up for the reduction in coal, i.e. a shift from one kind of fossil fuel to another.

Why utility bills are rapidly rising in some states (CBS News, Aug 23, 2025)
Electricity prices are climbing more than twice as fast as inflation (NPR, Aug 16, 2025)

Electricity costs are rising under Trump. Democrats want to make it an issue for the midterms (CNN, July 30, 2025)
Since 2022, retail electricity prices have increased faster than the rate of inflation, according to the US Energy Information Administration, which predicts prices will continue to rise through next year. Electricity prices are Americans’ second biggest annual energy expense, after paying for gasoline to fuel their vehicles, the EIA found.

Key US electricity price and output trends so far in 2025 (Reuters, July 23, 2025)
The first half of 2025 featured a slew of U.S. electricity and power milestones, with generation, demand and retail prices all scaling records during January to June.

It obviously doesn't help that Trump is doing his utmost to prevent wind farms from being built ... or even finished.

 

[dann]

Other people benefit from this, too: Danish wine (Wikipedia)

Vinhøsten i Danmark tegner godt (DR.dk, Sep 6, 2025)
I dag kan alle ved selvsyn opleve, hvordan vinen trives på 57 danske vingårde. Det er nemlig Dansk Vindag med åbent hus hos en lang række medlemmer af Dansk Vin.
Formand for brancheorganisationen Dansk Vin, Hans Münter, siger, at det skyldes klimaforandringerne, at der efterhånden er så mange steder i landet, man dyrker vin.
- Hvis ikke vi havde haft de klimaforandringer, så havde vi næppe haft en vinindustri i Danmark, så klimaforandringerne er den væsentligste driver til, at vi kan producere så god vin, som vi gør, siger Hans Münter.
- Vi udnytter det, at det er blevet varmere, og ser det som en positiv faktor. Men vi klapper ikke i hænderne over klimaforandringerne, siger han.

The wine harvest in Denmark is looking good
Today everybody can experience how the wine is doing in 57 Danish vineyards. It's Danish Wine Day with several members of Danish Wine opening their doors.
The president of the trade organization Danish Wine, Hans Münter, says that it's due to climate change that wine is grown in so many parts of the country.
– If it weren't for climate change, it's unlikely that we would have a wine industry in Denmark, so climate change is the main driver enabling us to produce wine as good as ours, Hans Münter says.
– We take advantage of the warmer climate and see it as a positive factor. But we don't applaud climate change, he says.

 

[dann]

'Lukewarmism':

Matt Ridley is Lying to You About Climate Change (Professor Dave Explains on YouTube, Sep 4, 2025 - 2:07:31)
It's finally time to tackle climate change denial. There are so many frauds peddling disinformation in this realm, so who should we tackle? The answer is Matt Ridley. He is the poster boy for "lukewarmism", which is a version of climate change denial that accepts some science surrounding this topic but denies other science, which makes it very dangerous, since it appears rational and science-based to the untrained ear. It's kind of like intelligent design, if young earth creationism is equivalent to an outright denial that global warming is happening at all. Matt is a super rich coal man who peddles a well-crafted script of lies regarding anthropogenic global warming, the amount of warming that has occurred, the amount that is projected to occur, and how dangerous it is. Let's get way into the weeds and debunk all of his claims as thoroughly as humanly possible, so that everyone will be equipped to combat this propaganda wherever they find it.

 

[dann]

Angus King Asks Trump Energy Nom To Name Cheapest Form Of Electricity Generation—Then She Says This (Forbes Breaking News on YouTube, Sep 6, 2025)
During a Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee hearing on Thursday, Sen. Angus King (I-ME) asked President Trump's nominee for the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission Laura Swett what the cheapest form of electricity generation is.

1:16-->
– What's the cheapest form of electricity generation today in the country?
– Thank you for the question, senator. I have not looked into that issue, but I am happy to look into it and answer any questions.
– Well, I'll help you. It's wind and solar by a mile and by a factor of two. The fellow who left here under difficult circumstances actually was correct. The cheapest form of energy today are wind and solar uh by a long shot. Do you know, uh, let's take a a case study, Iowa. Any idea how much wind power supplies to the economy of the electricity supply of Iowa?
– No sir, I don't know those specific numbers.
– 60%. Iowa is the 15th lowest electricity cost in the country. And in the past year, as we've already learned, average electricity prices across the country have gone up between six and 10%. In Iowa, it's actually gone down a half a percent.
The point is, uh, you both have talked about being agnostic. I hope you'll hold to that because we can't ignore the reality around us, that this administration is extremely hostile, and that's a mild term, to renewable energy.
And yet, and the second point, as I've talked about price, is speed. There's no question that wind and solar are the quickest to deploy.
Senator Hinrich mentioned if you wanted a new gas turbine plant today it would be about seven years between permitting and the fact that there's a five-year wait time for a turbine. A major solar project can go online in a year, a year and a half. So I just hope that you all will be true to your word today and not follow what amounts to an ideology that says we can't have wind and solar.

 

[dann]

I mentioned Canada a couple of times (not favorably) on page 50 of this thread, but things may be changing.
It will depend on how the electricity for those EVs is generated:

Trump Shocked As Canada May Scrap 100% EV Tariff On China (on YouTube, - min.)
Canada is considering scrapping its 100% tariff on Chinese electric vehicles, a move that could shake global trade and undercut Donald Trump’s tariff strategy. The shift would make EVs more affordable for Canadian families, ease tensions with China, and reopen vital agricultural markets like canola. Mark Carney and Mélanie Joly emphasize that this is about results, not ideology, signaling Canada’s readiness to diversify trade and assert independence. If Ottawa proceeds, it could redefine Canada’s role in global trade while sending a strong message to Washington. This developing story highlights a bold new chapter in Canadian economic strategy.