Global Warming Policy Discussion

[balrog666]

We are a world of smart people, still controlled by ego-maniacal political leaders, whom border on the socio-pathic.

Exactly. In support of that, I note that the primary discussions at Doha were about who would get the money/payoffs and how much of it, not what should be done with it.

 

[Praktik]

I think we lack the collective will to address the big problems because of our economic systems, and the power given to vast global corporate structures.
We're in the awkward last days of the cowboy round-up and the gold rush.

Political power is in bed with corporate interests, which have very little incentive to change what they do or sell. We would need to restructure some laws. The U.S. would do well to lead that effort, as we remain the biggest (%) 'sinners'. I don't think that can happen as long as Corporations are a person, with the money to buy elections.

Our previous president was an oil man (not very good at it, either) and the V.P. was the top man at a firm that profits from war.
There is an insane money-grab going on now, all over the world.

It's akin to the rush on buying guns in the U.S. We fear the inevitable regulations. We know that the low-hanging fruit is drying up, so, get it while you can rules the day.

There is some truth to what you are saying but i think the bigger issue is the fact we are not living in a utopian Star Trek-like united world but rather a world divided into competing fiefdoms.

This incentivizes the type of scattered policy response we are seeing with some nations recognizing the return on investment in environmental protection that accrues over generations and adjusting their calculae accordingly.

Others are still excluding $$ impacts from their economic analyses and for various reasons related to policy inertia and the protection of established power centers are continuing in a model that most satisfies this particular methodology.

It may not make sense that countries subsidize dirty methods of resource extraction and power generation at the expense of future generations and present-day efficiencies but when you recognize that future generations just aren't counted, and see the $$ benefits flowing to established centers of power you can recognize the logic behind why they do what they do.

I think that game theory comes into play too as some countries will be competing in the old and new models between themselves, and given the problem is a global one, this will necessarily dilute and slow our policy response and its effectiveness.

I am more and more of the mind that this will take a One World Government to fully realize success, because I can't see all 192 nations independently deciding to align on the proper forward course.

So i have become resigned to a certain apathy and a super long-term view.

If we think about the year 3000, I think they will look at the last few centuries of our present era as the time man set the stage for a bitter lesson with severe impacts that will mark a "forest fire" type moment, where much of us are burned away leaving the remnants to learn the lessons and bring man to a more symbiotic relationship with the environment we live in.

Its time we learn some lessons, and I think those established power centers need to experience drastic pain as a direct result of their activities before anything will really change.

 

[DC]

Exactly. In support of that, I note that the primary discussions at Doha were about who would get the money/payoffs and how much of it, not what should be done with it.

really?

 

[Virus]

I think the established environmental movement is made up of clueless, incompetent ideological idiots working in tandem with sleazy politically-connected hucksters running off with billions of taxpayer's cash.

 

[DC]

I think the established environmental movement is made up of clueless, incompetent ideological idiots working in tandem with sleazy politically-connected hucksters running off with billions of taxpayer's cash.

but you agree that AGW is a problem?
what do you think of the solutions sofar and the progress ?

 

[spin0]

EU launches clean fuel strategy

The European Commission today announced an ambitious package of measures to ensure the build-up of alternative fuel stations across Europe with common standards for their design and use. Policy initiatives so far have mostly addressed the actual fuels and vehicles, without considering fuels distribution. Efforts to provide incentives have been un-co-ordinated and insufficient.

Clean fuel is being held back by three main barriers: the high cost of vehicles, a low level of consumer acceptance, and the lack of recharging and refuelling stations. It is a vicious circle. Refuelling stations are not being built because there are not enough vehicles. Vehicles are not sold at competitive prices because there is not enough demand. Consumers do not buy the vehicles because they are expensive and the stations are not there. The Commission is therefore proposing a package of binding targets on Member States for a minimum level of infrastructure for clean fuels such as electricity, hydrogen and natural gas, as well as common EU wide standards for equipment needed.

EC Vice President Siim Kallas responsible for Transport said. "Developing innovative and alternative fuels is an obvious way to make Europe's economy more resource efficient, to reduce our overdependence on oil and develop a transport industry which is ready to respond to the demands of the 21st century. Between them, China and the US plan to have more than 6 million electric vehicles on the road by 2020. This is major opportunity for Europe to establish a strong position in a fast growing global market."

The Clean Power for Transport Package consists of a Communication on a European alternative fuels strategy, a Directive focusing on infrastructure and standards and an accompanying document describing an action plan for the development of Liquefied Natural Gas (LNG) in shipping.

 

[spin0]

Exactly. In support of that, I note that the primary discussions at Doha were about who would get the money/payoffs and how much of it, not what should be done with it.

really?

I'd like to hear the substance of that claim too - as it's not what I gathered from discussions at Doha.

 

[a_unique_person]

I think the established environmental movement is made up of clueless, incompetent ideological idiots working in tandem with sleazy politically-connected hucksters running off with billions of taxpayer's cash.

What policies should we follow to prevent the problems that will come with global warming. Science has told us what is coming, what is our appropriate response.

 

[Virus]

Rich Western environmentalist idiots hurt the poor.

Recent laws in the United States and Europe that mandate the increasing use of biofuel in cars have had far-flung ripple effects, economists say, as land once devoted to growing food for humans is now sometimes more profitably used for churning out vehicle fuel.
In a globalized world, the expansion of the biofuels industry has contributed to spikes in food prices and a shortage of land for food-based agriculture in poor corners of Asia, Africa and Latin America because the raw material is grown wherever it is cheapest.
Now that the United States is using 40 percent of its [corn] crop to make biofuel, it is not surprising that tortilla prices have doubled in Guatemala, which imports nearly half of its corn…Roughly 50 percent of the nation’s children are chronically malnourished, the fourth-highest rate in the world, according to the United Nations.

Brilliant. Nice one. Well done. If the Green establishment has any other ideas that starve to poor so rich, Western activists can feel good about themselves please let us know.

 

[DC]

Rich Western environmentalist idiots hurt the poor.



Brilliant. Nice one. Well done. If the Green establishment has any other ideas that starve to poor so rich, Western activists can feel good about themselves please let us know.

never was a fan of bio fuel, but anyway i would like to see the evidence for those claims. "contributed to spikes in food prices and a shortage of land for food-based agriculture in poor corners of Asia, Africa and Latin America"

 

[DC]

About Biofuels, i heard a talk from the Boeing Vice president, about the dreamliner, and he also mentioned biofuels for future planes. But especially pointed out its fuel grown on land not suitable for food and with dirt water unsuitable for human consumption.

 

[BenBurch]

About Biofuels, i heard a talk from the Boeing Vice president, about the dreamliner, and he also mentioned biofuels for future planes. But especially pointed out its fuel grown on land not suitable for food and with dirt water unsuitable for human consumption.

And if we keep managing land and water as we have, those two things will be in no short supply.

I'd very much prefer we went to a synfuel economy powered by solar or nuclear. And if we go nuclear it should be subcritical accelerator-pumped Thorium reactors.

We have a few more scaling factors to go before solar can do what I have in mind.

We now have processes that take electric power, water and atmospheric CO2 and make liquid fuels that can be re-formed into long-chain liquid fuels. You just need a lot of electric power because it's an inefficient process. (That last bit may improve.)

 

[DC]

And if we keep managing land and water as we have, those two things will be in no short supply.

I'd very much prefer we went to a synfuel economy powered by solar or nuclear. And if we go nuclear it should be subcritical accelerator-pumped Thorium reactors.

We have a few more scaling factors to go before solar can do what I have in mind.

We now have processes that take electric power, water and atmospheric CO2 and make liquid fuels that can be re-formed into long-chain liquid fuels. You just need a lot of electric power because it's an inefficient process. (That last bit may improve.)

yeah i wich the Koch brothers would spend as much money on Nuclear tech PR as they spend on the AGW denial PR.

if we want to keep or increase our standard of living as we want, yet want to limit CO2 levels. there is no way around Nuclear energy.

 

[DC]

Rich Western environmentalist idiots hurt the poor.



Brilliant. Nice one. Well done. If the Green establishment has any other ideas that starve to poor so rich, Western activists can feel good about themselves please let us know.

have you ever protested or taken action against it? whenever i see protests or actions against biol fuels like palmoil from the rainforest. they are groups like greenpeace. but never have i seen anybody else protesting or rise awareness. where are the libertarian groups ? why are they not protesting against it? they only make ssome claims on the internet. but take no action.

 

[spin0]

Rich Western environmentalist idiots hurt the poor.
As Biofuel Demand Grows, So Do Guatemala’s Hunger Pangs
Brilliant. Nice one. Well done. If the Green establishment has any other ideas that starve to poor so rich, Western activists can feel good about themselves please let us know.

[editorialized, clueless headline fixed]

You do realize that you're actually in agreement with enviromentalists who for years have raised awareness, warned, opposed and demonstrated against these very dangers of biofuel production. For example Greenpeace, 2007: Biofuels: green dream or climate change nightmare?
George Monbiot, 2004: Feeding Cars, Not People
World Bank, 2008: Poor go hungry while rich fill their tanks

Good to hear that you have finally become aware of these serious problems. This wikiarticle has more information: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Food_vs_fuel


The problem is not biofuels per se, they could very well be part of the solution to reduce GHG's. But some of the ways they are produced may cause and have caused problems (e.g. food prices, water usage, deforestation etc).

It is possible to figure out various solutions to those problems, for example Brazil already has a sustainable biofuel economy. And it's possible to develop techonologies and better methods to produce biofuels: New biofuels offer hope to hungry world

But Lars Hansen of Novozymes in Denmark, which produces enzymes to break down the crops used for biofuels, says there are currently large amounts of bio-mass not being used.

Speaking about the second-generation of biofuels, he says: "The way forward is to convert the residue part of the crop into sugars which can then be used for fuels."

By residue, he means the part of the crop which is not eaten - the stalks and husks, and also wood chippings.

He says that technology is ready now and should be deployed to provide a solution to many problems.

"If you take just 20% of the agricultural and forest residue available in Europe, which can sustainably be taken away from the fields, you can make half of Europe's gasoline demands," he says.

 

[bobwtfomg]

have you ever protested or taken action against it? whenever i see protests or actions against biol fuels like palmoil from the rainforest. they are groups like greenpeace. but never have i seen anybody else protesting or rise awareness. where are the libertarian groups ? why are they not protesting against it? they only make ssome claims on the internet. but take no action.

Exactly libertarians don't really care about the fuel v. food issue, they just see it as a stick to beat enviromentalists with when actually it's been people in the enviromental movement that have been the most critical of, and at the forefront of, campaigns against the biofuel industry.

Europe's largest conference on biofuels was brought to a halt this morning when environmental activists invaded the main hall and accused the industry of destroying rainforests, evicting communities, and increasing hunger and climate change around the world.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environment/2008/oct/16/activists-biofuels

9 activists from Plane Stupid and AAA (Action Against Agrofuels) have been arrested gate crashing Virgin Atlantic’s 25th birthday party at Heathrow airport, to highlight plans to allow the aviation industry to continue to expand if it uses biofuels instead of conventional aviation fuel.
Dee Rughani of AAA added, “The aviation industry is pretending that biofuels reduce greenhouse gas emissions when all the peer reviewed science states that the opposite is true. Whether it’s palm oil or 2nd generation biofuels, both will still compete for land, so any growth in this industry will add further to the 100 million people
already going hungry due to biofuels whilst exacerbating tropical forest destruction and climate change.”

http://www.indymedia.org.uk/en/2009/06/433055.html

Protesters gathered outside the Department of Energy and Climate Change offices calling for the end of subsidies for bioenergy, in a demonstration organised by Biofuelwatch with the support of Campaign against Climate Change.

http://www.campaigncc.org/biofuelsdemo2011

Hundreds of environment protesters have held a rally against plans to build a biofuel power station in Dorset.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england-dorset-11411299

On 10th August Greenpeace joined other environmental groups outside the Bristol City Council House to protest against the building of a £70m biofuel power plant at Avonmouth.

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/groups/bristol/blog/protest-against-plans-biofuel-plant-avonmouth

Helsinki/Finland. Activists from Greenpeace are today protesting in Helsinki against deforestation and social problems caused by the growing demand for palm oil in biofuel production.

http://www.bmf.ch/en/news/?show=252

 

[Virus]

Mafia involved in Green energy.

In an unfolding plot that is part “The Sopranos,” part “An Inconvenient Truth,” authorities swept across Sicily last month in the latest wave of sting operations revealing years of deep infiltration into the renewable-energy sector by Italy’s rapidly modernizing crime families.

The still-emerging links of the mafia to the once-booming wind and solar sector here are raising fresh questions about the use of government subsidies to fuel a shift toward cleaner energies, with critics claiming that huge state incentives created excessive profits for companies and a market bubble ripe for fraud.

Why not? Green energy is scam city.

 

[DC]

Mafia involved in Green energy.



Why not? Green energy is scam city.

and what policychanges should be implemented to prevent something like this happening if it really happened?

 

[Virus]

and what policychanges should be implemented to prevent something like this happening if it really happened?

Don't lavish subsides and cheap loans on mickey mouse power that can't compete on the global energy market.

 

[DC]

Don't lavish subsides and cheap loans on mickey mouse power that can't compete.

but how would we push alternative energy technology? Wouldn't it be more usefull to actually implement better guidelines and controlls of such projects. preventing the abuse of the system rather than stoping the system as a whole.