Everything Climate Change

[Apollo]

I disagree on both accounts. I think Canada is the PERFECT candidate to lead by example and show the entire world what can be done by taking a proactive approach, and innovate for the future. The amount of jobs created and commercial investment could be unprecedented, but these corporations will NOT take the first step. Why would they when they have investors to please and a bottom line to maintain. Status quo wins the day for them.

As for the 3rd World Countries having to "miss out", I think that is bit misleading, as Solar and Wind Technology will help develop these countries more than any "Coal" plant ever could. A great example of 3rd World Counties actually "getting it" is Nigeria just completely banning plastic bags altogether, which they did last year. We need more 3rd World Countries to realize that a lot of the "luxuries" that Industrialized nations have are completely useless and obtained by unnecessarily harmful methods, all of which could easily be improved, and that they aren't "missing out" on anything really, except skipping all the mistakes we had to make the learn lessons we have.

Where we are is in large part due to the development of our resources and manuafacturing; heavy industry.

Solar and wind are unreliable compared gas and coal plants. They're also far more expensive. You'd also be asking them to ignore the wealth of oil, gas and coal they may have on their lands.

You'd also be asking them to not follow countries likes China and Mexico in manufacturing inexpensive goods thanks to cheap labour. Manufacturing is the best way for a poor country to stimulate their economy and grow.

You're going to have a hard time convincing anyone of anything if all the developed countries still rely on manufacturing and our current inexpensive generation technologies.

This is not a simple matter to say the least. It's something that would take decades to work out.

[Miekenstien]

Where we are is in large part due to the development of our resources and manuafacturing; heavy industry.

Solar and wind are unreliable compared gas and coal plants. They're also far more expensive. You'd also be asking them to ignore the wealth of oil, gas and coal they may have on their lands.

You'd also be asking them to not follow countries likes China and Mexico in manufacturing inexpensive goods thanks to cheap labour. Manufacturing is the best way for a poor country to stimulate their economy and grow.

You're going to have a hard time convincing anyone of anything if all the developed countries still rely on manufacturing and our current inexpensive generation technologies.

This is not a simple matter to say the least . It's something that would take decades to work out.

seconds in universe time. would be like the passed 100 yeas didn't even happen, pollution wise

[Apollo]

I'll point out that Canada will take a long, long time moving away from gas fired turbines because they're highly efficient, relatively inexpensive and they don't take much of a toll on the environment. They're very clean plants and those sensational pictures which show the skies filled with "deadly emissions" is actually mostly steam, a primary product of such generation and very prominent on a cold winter day.

I think one of the best long term energy sources should be hydro... But there are also concerns with those plants as well but its just not the marketing sensation that is man made climate change.

I think eventually you'll see homes with solar panels on their roofs, and those panels connected to battery stations in the home; there are already people doing this. This will bring down the need for as much generation but the government will of course tax the shit out of it.

We're talking far, far out there though. If Canada were serious about it though they could offer large tax credits to those who add in this alternative to their energy consumption in the year of installation; sort of like how Harper gave out that tax credit a few years ago for home renos. There would be times when they would have surplus(sold to the grid) and times when they would have insufficient supply.

[Nilanka]

Just came across this thread today. Apologies for my laziness, but can someone sum up what we're arguing here? We all agree that climate is changing, but it's unknown whether humans have any impact? Is that the gist of this thread?

[raptors999]

For me, the increase in carbon as well as the destruction of the environment caused by human activity is real but the "Global Warming" concept is being exploited and exaggerated. Trade barriers and tariffs as well as carbon taxes will be erected by politicians to "combat" "Global Warming" - I actually don't know how sarcastic quotes work

[mcHAPPY]

Just came across this thread today. Apologies for my laziness, but can someone sum up what we're arguing here? We all agree that climate is changing, but it's unknown whether humans have any impact? Is that the gist of this thread?

I believe pollution is a serious problem that should be tackled.

However, man is not changing climate is my view. I don't believe climate change is happening any differently than it has happened over the previous 6 000 000 000 years of earth's existence.

[Miekenstien]

I think one of the best long term energy sources should be hydro... But there are also concerns with those plants as well but its just not the marketing sensation that is man made climate change.

my dad is actually working on a giant hydro mill construction in the bay of fundy

Just came across this thread today. Apologies for my laziness, but can someone sum up what we're arguing here? We all agree that climate is changing, but it's unknown whether humans have any impact? Is that the gist of this thread?

pretty much, seems all in agreement on what is good for earth and the right way to treat it. some climategate stuff was posted, so far been tame and nice

For me, the increase in carbon as well as the destruction of the environment caused by human activity is real but the "Global Warming" concept is being exploited and exaggerated. Trade barriers and tariffs as well as carbon taxes will be erected by politicians to "combat" "Global Warming" - I actually don't know how sarcastic quotes work

i think on this site you have "sarcastic" figured out pretty well

I believe pollution is a serious problem that should be tackled.

However, man is not changing climate is my view. I don't believe climate change is happening any differently than it has happened over the previous 6 000 000 000 years of earth's existence.

not differently than historically is still happening. i agree with this.

[Apollo]

my dad is actually working on a giant hydro mill construction in the bay of fundy

There are a bunch of projects happening. There is also a massive 3000 MW project starting up in Labrador as well which will power Atlantic Canada and also marketed to the U.S.

Alberta has big hydro plans as well. They're also looking at wind and solar. Wind and solar, again, not reliable enough to count on.

i think on this site you have "sarcastic" figured out pretty well

Don't forget to highlight the word and press Ctrl+I. Italics people, I can't stress it enough.

Just came across this thread today. Apologies for my laziness, but can someone sum up what we're arguing here? We all agree that climate is changing, but it's unknown whether humans have any impact? Is that the gist of this thread?

Basically there are two discussions ongoing:

• Man's impact on climate.
• Man's ability to unify to lessen it's impact on the world.

I'm surprised no one has brought up certain parties' goal for a global government, a new world order.

[Nilanka]

So are you guys suggesting that 97% of scientists who study this, are either duped, or are part of a global conspiracy to raise taxes?

[Apollo]

Well, the climategate bit was sorted earlier so I don't know people are suggesting that anymore. There is an ongoing discussion about how some may be attempting to exploit people through the issues (ie: wealth redistribution via environmental taxes).

[Nilanka]

Well, the climategate bit was sorted earlier so I don't know people are suggesting that anymore. There is an ongoing discussion about how some may be attempting to exploit people through the issues (ie: wealth redistribution via environmental taxes).

That's the beauty of science. It's self-correcting . If any fraudulent data was published, then it's only a matter of time until the hoax is revealed. All scientists do is attempt to prove each other wrong.

Until then, I trust the evidence presented to date (from countless sources) which directly links increased CO2 levels with humanity. For me, this isn't even a debate. Humans are impacting the climate.

[Miekenstien]

Until then, I trust the evidence presented to date (from countless sources) which directly links increased CO2 levels with humanity. For me, this isn't even a debate. Humans are impacting the climate.

impacting the climate is to big. we are impacting the environment. earlier i had mentioned that in no science does correlation equal causation except in this one instance. and i also posted a chart of co2 levels and temperatures for the passed 1.5 million years that point towards nothing that hasn't happened before is happening again. both happy and i have pointed towards the giant ball of radiation 93 million miles away as the cause of the change.

the model we use for co2 green house effects is venus, where again our knowledge is limited in causes etc. we see end times of venus, compare that with our world and make theories and guesses about their similarities.

[Nilanka]

impacting the climate is to big. we are impacting the environment. earlier i had mentioned that in no science does correlation equal causation except in this one instance. and i also posted a chart of co2 levels and temperatures for the passed 1.5 million years that point towards nothing that hasn't happened before is happening again. both happy and i have pointed towards the giant ball of radiation 93 million miles away as the cause of the change.

the model we use for co2 green house effects is venus, where again our knowledge is limited in causes etc. we see end times of venus, compare that with our world and make theories and guesses about their similarities.

Is NASA no longer a trusted source of information?



http://climate.nasa.gov/evidence/

[Miekenstien]

but even this is less than even 1% of the last 1 000 000 000 years. life/plants have all flourished at higher levels. 25 years ago it was acid rain that was the threat.

not sure how far back you have read, so again, i am totally for any green energy and cleaning everything about the environment that we can. i just don't think it is as drastic and threatening that it is made out to be.

the best argument, in the form of an analogy, for global warming i have heard came to me from my friend and probably via some other source. but he basically says that the atmosphere has us locked in a garage. the actual space between all of the surface area of the earth and the atmosphere in its' entirety is what is being filled up with co2. we all know what happens when you sit in a closed garage and run your car.

this argument gives a good visual of the co2 problems, but even using the levels we are at and higher levels throughout the history of our planet still hasn't been enough to choke out life.

everyone is pretty much in a hurry to save rich peoples beach houses right now while they profit off it.

[Nilanka]

What would you say is responsible for the giant spike in CO2 levels over the past 50-60 years in that graph? An unexplained spike in solar energy?

I don't think we're talking about the potential to choke out life, but how impactful even a 1-2 degree change in surface temperature will be, raise sea levels, reducing land mass, etc.