Climate Change: tipping point

[CanOWorms]

Kyoto = colonialism

It's well known that the European economy is going to reach a catastrophic downturn as their birth rates decrease, population ages, and they still refuse to let in immigrants. So, what's the solution in the European way of thinking? Destroy everyone else! If they can cause developing nations and others (US, Australia) to slow down their growth, Europe won't be as irrelevant in the future.

If you read about Kyoto, it's obvious that it's not even a real environmental agreement since it's anti-environmental, too.

The problem is that Kyoto has become a new world religion with fanatical followers.

 

[Moonbeam]

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: ntdz

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: K1052
The treaty is useless anyway since China and India are not included.

It's worthless because americans are not in it, lets face it, you must be inherently stupid if you can continue to say things like that. YOU RELEASE 25% OF _ALL_ GREENHOUSE GASSES RELEASED; ALL OVER THE WORLD!!! You're the friggin idiots.

Go away you piece of european trash. Guess what, we emit the most greenhouse gases because we are the most productive. Productivity takes ENERGY. You lazy europeans wouldn't know about that with your 35 hour work week.

Go educate yourself you arrogant piece of american ignorance. You have 30% higher per capita GDP while producing 100% more CO2 than Germany for instance. The problem is not your awesome productivity but your ridiculous inefficiency

fast google search

But my oil stocks are doing well. I'm sure if we followed your advise I wouldn't be so rich.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: irwincur
The Kyoto treaty was nothing more than a European attempt at crippling the US economy to actually give theirs a fighting chance. It was biased, colored, and completely unfair from the start.

Not to mention that the great majority of climatologists still do not buy into the global warming hype. When anything close to half of them jump aboard I will start considering it. To this point, it has been nothing but a great funding vehicle for varied crack pot scientists and liberal interest groups.

Bull from one end of that post to the other.

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Kyoto = colonialism

It's well known that the European economy is going to reach a catastrophic downturn as their birth rates decrease, population ages, and they still refuse to let in immigrants. So, what's the solution in the European way of thinking? Destroy everyone else! If they can cause developing nations and others (US, Australia) to slow down their growth, Europe won't be as irrelevant in the future.

If you read about Kyoto, it's obvious that it's not even a real environmental agreement since it's anti-environmental, too.

The problem is that Kyoto has become a new world religion with fanatical followers.

Do you actually believe what you're saying there?

 

[judasmachine]

We're gonna pout and not participate because Russia, China, and India aren't playing? Some freaking leader we are........

See you all in Hell.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I'm getting mine while I can and fvck you and the rest of the world.

There's nothing saying SF or california or any other state can't ban things like cars.. Why don't they? Because they like to complain but enjoy the benefits of cheap energy just like everyone else.

Meh.. humans, even envriomental nuts, must be forced to replace GHG though depletion nothing else since the cost/benefit is too high.

 

[NeenerNeener]

Originally posted by: Zebo

Originally posted by: Moonbeam
I'm getting mine while I can and fvck you and the rest of the world.

There's nothing saying SF or california or any other state can't ban things like cars.. Why don't they? Because they like to complain but enjoy the benefits of cheap energy just like everyone else.

Meh.. humans, even envriomental nuts, must be forced to replace GHG though depletion nothing else since the cost/benefit is too high.

Well, the cost/benefit of driving a gas guzzler is already going up, so in that case people already have an incentive to get a more efficient vehicle.

 

[piasabird]

The west coast gets pollution from Asia evan from accross the entire pacific ocean. Pollution is definitely a cumulative problem. I look around and I see companies trying to do better and I see other companies that the EPA keeps giving waivers to. I dont see how any aggreement is going to change that. It does not matter who is in office or what party they are from.

I want to see how the parties to this treaty are going to verify their compliance.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Kyoto = colonialism

It's well known that the European economy is going to reach a catastrophic downturn as their birth rates decrease, population ages, and they still refuse to let in immigrants. So, what's the solution in the European way of thinking? Destroy everyone else! If they can cause developing nations and others (US, Australia) to slow down their growth, Europe won't be as irrelevant in the future.

If you read about Kyoto, it's obvious that it's not even a real environmental agreement since it's anti-environmental, too.

The problem is that Kyoto has become a new world religion with fanatical followers.

Do you actually believe what you're saying there?

How can you not believe the truth?

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: CanOWorms
Kyoto = colonialism

It's well known that the European economy is going to reach a catastrophic downturn as their birth rates decrease, population ages, and they still refuse to let in immigrants. So, what's the solution in the European way of thinking? Destroy everyone else! If they can cause developing nations and others (US, Australia) to slow down their growth, Europe won't be as irrelevant in the future.

If you read about Kyoto, it's obvious that it's not even a real environmental agreement since it's anti-environmental, too.

The problem is that Kyoto has become a new world religion with fanatical followers.

Do you actually believe what you're saying there?

How can you not believe the truth?

Well, i'm asking you that too.
I know there are, well problems is to small a word to use about the future of europe with no new children (it's actualy the way i would prefer it! Kids should soon be history).
But that you say europeans are genetically evil and that we just want to hurt you before we go out. That's not borderline insanity, that is way beyong the border.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Well, i'm asking you that too.
I know there are, well problems is to small a word to use about the future of europe with no new children (it's actualy the way i would prefer it! Kids should soon be history).
But that you say europeans are genetically evil and that we just want to hurt you before we go out. That's not borderline insanity, that is way beyong the border.

I think you're way beyond the border with the belief that there will be no children in Europe. I have no clue why you're talking about genetics. I think that it's a societal problem.

Looking at the history of colonialism and how the European powers left them after their rape, it seems pretty obvious that they will hurt the world before they go out.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

This pretty much sums up how effective Kyoto is.

You emit the most greenhouse gasses because you have no self control regarding gas use. Your gass prices are so low because you don't want to put taxes on them to save the environment.

I have news for ya. NOBODY, Europe included, raises taxes to protect the environment. They raise taxes so they have more money to spend and can excercise more control over the populace.

And i'm not even gonna comment on your thought about europeans being lazy. Because that's just stupid.

Didn't the French just have a near riot when the minimum work week was raised to *gasp* 40 hours a week? Oh the horror. I imagine they will probably burn the country down if they lose their month of vacation.

Being forced to work 2 jobs because you have an insane minimum pay of, what is it, 6$? Is not "not being lazy", that's more like slavery.

You do know that that's the minimum right? Almost everyone over the age of 16 makes more than that. I'm easily in the top 15% of wage earners in this country and I put in 70+ hours a week. That's not slavery, that's earning an early retirement that isn't held at the whim of the government.

That is the falldown of capitalism, the thought of the untameable market. How long will you imagine that to last?

For as long as people want a better life than they have?

The average European is as little lazy as the average American.

Bwaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaahahahahahahahahahahahahahahaha

 

[Forsythe]

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Well, i'm asking you that too.
I know there are, well problems is to small a word to use about the future of europe with no new children (it's actualy the way i would prefer it! Kids should soon be history).
But that you say europeans are genetically evil and that we just want to hurt you before we go out. That's not borderline insanity, that is way beyong the border.

I think you're way beyond the border with the belief that there will be no children in Europe. I have no clue why you're talking about genetics. I think that it's a societal problem.

Looking at the history of colonialism and how the European powers left them after their rape, it seems pretty obvious that they will hurt the world before they go out.

Well, i know italy's population is falling, not counting immigrations. I was just overacting.
And i think you're stupid for suggesting that. What happened to the environmental reason?

 

[Forsythe]

How much is gas pr. litre in the states? I can tell you it's more than 1.5$ pr. litre here. And taxes are not raised to get more money, oh no, not on a thing like this. We have a steady surplus and every year they wonder what they should use it too. And yes, that is control of the population. To stop them from using that much gas.

Why does people have to work 70 hours pr. week? We're not lazy, it's just bloody stupid! I'd rather just sit around 35 of those hours and drink red wine, and then work smarter, not harder, those other 35 hours. Besides, almost nobody works 35 hours pr. week. Mostly only people that perform hard physical labour.
And i'm talking about all the poor black people generally in the south. But everywhere else aswell.

As long as someone stays poor, i'm sure you're going to be okay...

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: Forsythe
How much is gas pr. litre in the states? I can tell you it's more than 1.5$ pr. litre here. And taxes are not raised to get more money, oh no, not on a thing like this. We have a steady surplus and every year they wonder what they should use it too. And yes, that is control of the population. To stop them from using that much gas.

Why does people have to work 70 hours pr. week? We're not lazy, it's just bloody stupid! I'd rather just sit around 35 of those hours and drink red wine, and then work smarter, not harder, those other 35 hours. Besides, almost nobody works 35 hours pr. week. Mostly only people that perform hard physical labour.
And i'm talking about all the poor black people generally in the south. But everywhere else aswell.

As long as someone stays poor, i'm sure you're going to be okay...

So people work more or less than 35 hours where you're from?

As for your poor comment: Do you really believe that I get off on poverty? Do you believe that the money I make is taken from someone else in an effort to keep them poor? That's what it sounds like. To the contrary, if more people made more money I'd be even better off than I am.

I firmly believe that being poor is a choice. You can't do anything about the environment or station in life you are born into but beyond that you can choose to stay where you are or you can choose to make your life better. It's easier for some people than for others but it's not impossible for anyone.

 

[CanOWorms]

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Originally posted by: CanOWorms

Originally posted by: Forsythe

Well, i'm asking you that too.
I know there are, well problems is to small a word to use about the future of europe with no new children (it's actualy the way i would prefer it! Kids should soon be history).
But that you say europeans are genetically evil and that we just want to hurt you before we go out. That's not borderline insanity, that is way beyong the border.

I think you're way beyond the border with the belief that there will be no children in Europe. I have no clue why you're talking about genetics. I think that it's a societal problem.

Looking at the history of colonialism and how the European powers left them after their rape, it seems pretty obvious that they will hurt the world before they go out.

Well, i know italy's population is falling, not counting immigrations. I was just overacting.
And i think you're stupid for suggesting that. What happened to the environmental reason?

Environmental reason? Oh, I don't know, maybe it's the fact that Kyoto won't do anything (just made to make people think that they're actually doing something), destroy entire forests and replace them with foreign trees, destroy entire forests in favor of livestock, increase the problem of global warming, etc. I think you're stupid for seriously asking such a question!

 

[shira]

I'm hoping, praying for gasoline to reach $10 a gallon. At that level, every other source of energy will look cheap and a REAL commitment to alternative energy will commence.

In 2105, in a world driven by pollution-free energy, our descendents will look back at 2005 and shake their heads in bewilderment at how America's leaders could have been so clueless.

 

[NeenerNeener]

Originally posted by: shira
I'm hoping, praying for gasoline to reach $10 a gallon. At that level, every other source of energy will look cheap and a REAL commitment to alternative energy will commence.

In 2105, in a world driven by pollution-free energy, our descendents will look back at 2005 and shake their heads in bewilderment at how America's leaders could have been so clueless.

QFT

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: shira
I'm hoping, praying for gasoline to reach $10 a gallon. At that level, every other source of energy will look cheap and a REAL commitment to alternative energy will commence.

In 2105, in a world driven by pollution-free energy, our descendents will look back at 2005 and shake their heads in bewilderment at how America's leaders could have been so clueless.

You want $10/gallon? That is complete insanity. Do you realize what you are wishing upon the average family of four in this country? Or the ability for manufacturers to deliver goods to market? Eesh...

 

[chcarnage]

Here are some facts & figures about the Kyoto Protocol (again from my uni course about international ressource management):

The flexible mechanisms/loopholes of the treaty are:

1. Joint implementation
Nation A can help Nation B to lower its emissions (e.g. build a environment friendly power plant) and take the reduction on its own account. Critic: It costs more to reduce pollution in high-tech/developed nations so there's a danger that they won't attempt enough to decrease their own emissions.

2. Clean Development Mechanism
As above, but this time Nation A helps to prevent future emitters (e.g. build a public traffic system with low ecological impact).

3. Emission Trade
Nation A buys emission rights from Nation B because A can't meet its reduction goal while B didn't bail out their rights. Critic: An easy way to make money for Nations whose economy decreased anyway since 1990 (Russia).

4. Sinks
Reforestated areas bind CO2. Critic: The durability is hard to prove.

With the current group of contractors, in 2010 the yearly global emission of CO2 will be 7,6 bil. tons instead of 8,0. (In 1990, mankind emitted 5,8 bil. t) (Source: US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 1998/99).

But the US are going to increase their emissions by 28,7% until 2010, compared with their 1990 emissions (Source: Greenpeace 2002). In 2001, it emitted already 113% of the 1990 dosis. Like the other developed contractors, it would have to reduce to 93% compared to 1990.

If the US would sign the treaty and use all loopholes, it would be allowed to change the emissions to circa 109%.

That said I still think of Kyoto as a good start and psychologically important treaty: 34 of 38 industrialized nations who emit 62% of the six gasses of the developed world ratified the treaty. Over all not less than 150 nations ratified the treaty.

While it is far from solving the global warming problem, it is not at all anti-american snake oil but has a positive impact.

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: chcarnage
Here are some facts & figures about the Kyoto Protocol (again from my uni course about international ressource management):

The flexible mechanisms/loopholes of the treaty are:

1. Joint implementation
Nation A can help Nation B to lower its emissions (e.g. build a environment friendly power plant) and take the reduction on its own account. Critic: It costs more to reduce pollution in high-tech/developed nations so there's a danger that they won't attempt enough to decrease their own emissions.

2. Clean Development Mechanism
As above, but this time Nation A helps to prevent future emitters (e.g. build a public traffic system with low ecological impact).

3. Emission Trade
Nation A buys emission rights from Nation B because A can't meet its reduction goal while B didn't bail out their rights. Critic: An easy way to make money for Nations whose economy decreased anyway since 1990 (Russia).

4. Sinks
Reforestated areas bind CO2. Critic: The durability is hard to prove.

With the current group of contractors, in 2010 the yearly global emission of CO2 will be 7,6 bil. tons instead of 8,0. (In 1990, mankind emitted 5,8 bil. t) (Source: US Department of Energy, Energy Information Administration, 1998/99).

But the US are going to increase their emissions by 28,7% until 2010, compared with their 1990 emissions (Source: Greenpeace 2002). In 2001, it emitted already 113% of the 1990 dosis. Like the other developed contractors, it would have to reduce to 93% compared to 1990.

If the US would sign the treaty and use all loopholes, it would be allowed to change the emissions to circa 109%.

That said I still think of Kyoto as a good start and psychologically important treaty: 34 of 38 industrialized nations who emit 62% of the six gasses of the developed world ratified the treaty. Over all not less than 150 nations ratified the treaty.

While it is far from solving the global warming problem, it is not at all anti-american snake oil but has a positive impact.

Here's the "positive" impact.

http://www.junkscience.com/MSU_Temps/Kyoto_Count_Up.htm

 

[B00ne]

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
This pretty much sums up how effective Kyoto is.

You emit the most greenhouse gasses because you have no self control regarding gas use. Your gass prices are so low because you don't want to put taxes on them to save the environment.

I have news for ya. NOBODY, Europe included, raises taxes to protect the environment. They raise taxes so they have more money to spend and can excercise more control over the populace.

Wrong we have an eco tax on gas which is used to subsidize renewable energy efforts - result is we are by far the largest producer of wind power

I am not saying the way the subsidies are done is great - but just for refuting your point
Another side effect, diesel cars are now at around 50% market share

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: B00ne

Originally posted by: Whoozyerdaddy
This pretty much sums up how effective Kyoto is.

You emit the most greenhouse gasses because you have no self control regarding gas use. Your gass prices are so low because you don't want to put taxes on them to save the environment.

I have news for ya. NOBODY, Europe included, raises taxes to protect the environment. They raise taxes so they have more money to spend and can excercise more control over the populace.

Wrong we have an eco tax on gas which is used to subsidize renewable energy efforts - result is we are by far the largest producer of wind power

I am not saying the way the subsidies are done is great - but just for refuting your point
Another side effect, diesel cars are now at around 50% market share

How much is collected by that tax and how much of it is actually spent on what it's supposed to be spent on?

 

[B00ne]

The tax is about 15cent/l

I dont know how much of it is going to the subsidies - I dont think that would be easy to find out either - because taxes seldom allocated directly to certain things

Anyway our gas (energy in general since we dont have any- except for coal which is much more expensive than the coal from the world market) has always been expensive and taxes make up about 70% of the ?1.22 that I pay per liter now

 

[Whoozyerdaddy]

Originally posted by: B00ne
The tax is about 15cent/l

I dont know how much of it is going to the subsidies - I dont think that would be easy to find out either - because taxes seldom allocated directly to certain things

Anyway our gas (energy in general since we dont have any- except for coal which is much more expensive than the coal from the world market) has always been expensive and taxes make up about 70% of the ?1.22 that I pay per liter now

My point exactly.