"Greenhouse gas emissions increased by a record amount last year, to the highest carbon output in history, putting hopes of holding global warming to safe levels all but out of reach, according to unpublished estimates from the International Energy Agency.
The shock rise means the goal of preventing a temperature rise of more than 2 degrees Celsius – which scientists say is the threshold for potentially "dangerous climate change" – is likely to be just "a nice Utopia", according to Fatih Birol, chief economist of the IEA. It also shows the most serious global recession for 80 years has had only a minimal effect on emissions, contrary to some predictions."
The introduction of the IEA and Fatih Birol into the climate change debate is VERY interesting and supports my long-standing view that we have continued political attempts going on to use climate change to justify reducing global fossil fuel consumption because of the whole Peak Oil situation. If you read the linked article it is very clear to me that TPTB are using the fear of climate change to attempt to prepare and indeed try to mitigate the oncoming oil decline.
We have phrases, such as "dangerous climate change" being used in the article to try and scare us into accepting that we have to use less fossil fuel - oil. Birol, says "I am very worried" another statement meant to inform people we have to cut our use of oil. The article states that Birol is "widely regarding as one of the world's foremost experts on emissions" - since when has this been the case? News to me anyway...... We measure the amount of CO2 in the air at Mauna Loa, Hawaii (and other sites)
Then we have another warning about our concerns over nuclear use, "People may not like nuclear, but it is one of the major technologies for generating electricity without carbon dioxide," said Birol.
Then we have this statement; He urged governments to take action urgently. "This should be a wake-up call. A chance [of staying below 2 degrees] would be if we had a legally binding international agreement or major moves on clean energy technologies, energy efficiency and other technologies."
Does anybody else see this as a propaganda exercise to attempt to prepare us for declining oil?
PS. I am not stating that I disagree with all the above statements, just that I see us being prepared for oil decline and part of the justification is the impact of FF use on catastrophic climate change.....
snow hope wrote:
Does anybody else see this as a propaganda exercise to attempt to prepare us for declining oil?
No.
"We have phrases, such as "dangerous climate change" being used in the article to try and scare us into accepting that we have to use less fossil fuel - oil."
Climate change is dangerous. We are still not out of "wiping out Life on Earth and turning this planet into a slightly-larger version of Venus" territory. It is the worst-case scenario, but it is still on the radar. Hopefully something really dreadful will happen to Homo sapiens quite soon and everything else will live happily ever after.
snow hope wrote:We have phrases, such as "dangerous climate change" being used in the article to try and scare us into accepting that we have to use less fossil fuel - oil.
The "dangerous" language has its origins in the 1992 United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change - I don't think anyone then was developing scare stories based on fossil fuel limitations.
Snow, on the one hand I think you are right to question the motivation of those "scaring" us with climate change horror stories. However, in this case, I believe them - not because of any implicit trust in their motives, but because the evidence for climate change is all around. I've observed the weather in the UK getting warmer with my own eyes (don't be lulled into a false sense of security by a few cold weeks the last few winters - look at the overall proportion of months that are "warmer than average" and it's 70-80% of them.)
Then, what about the retreating glaciers and polar ice? Are armies of CIA employees creeping up the valleys at night and hacking away the glaciers?
As I say, it is an interesting coincidence that climate change is a such useful way of trying (not with much success so far) to wean us off fossil fuels. And certainly, politicians are going to use it as much as possible to hide the truth about Peak Oil. I've actually had the same thoughts as you on this subject. But on thinking more about the actual evidence, I believe that climate change is as serious as we're told.
"We're just waiting, looking skyward as the days go down / Someone promised there'd be answers if we stayed around."
Since when have the IEA been experts on "estimating" carbon emissions? The CO2 in the atmosphere is measured at 66 stations/countries around the world. I thought the IPCC were supposed to be the experts in this field.....
snow hope wrote:The article states that Birol is "widely regarding as one of the world's foremost experts on emissions" - since when has this been the case? News to me anyway...... We measure the amount of CO2 in the air at Mauna Loa, Hawaii (and other sites)
Mauna Loa doesn't measure emissions - it measures what's there.
Birol measures fossil fuel production, and since most of it gets burnt pretty quickly it makes a good proxy for measuring CO2 emissions. Easier to measure at the well head than at the exhaust pipe.
It's hardly surprising to find CO2 emissions peaking about the same time that oil production peaks.
I doubt there's any grand plan to warn about climate because of worries over oil depletion of vice versa. There are two big problem, inextricably linked. Which one is emphasised depends on how one is feeling and who the audience is.
snow hope wrote:Since when have the IEA been experts on "estimating" carbon emissions? The CO2 in the atmosphere is measured at 66 stations/countries around the world. I thought the IPCC were supposed to be the experts in this field.....
Emissions from fossil fuels are very closely related to fossil fuel use, you calculate emissions by looking at fuel use not be measuring the atmosphere. Between emissions and atmospheric concentration you have a the very tricky carbon cycle to worry about. It's pretty hard to work out what/where emissions are from atmospheric measurements.
JohnB wrote:Why is everyone going on about CO2 again? World football is in crisis, so can't people get their priorities right?
That made me laugh out loud John!
Yes, I accept the point about measuring emissions at source. It's just that the article smells of more scaring tactics to use less fossil fuels because of imminent decline.
JohnB wrote:Why is everyone going on about CO2 again? World football is in crisis, so can't people get their priorities right?
Ah yes football. I don't think there's any Brighton fans posting here, so I can gloat without guilt. Put briefly, after winning the League One title and being promoted to the Championship, Brighton have just lost their best striker to their bitterest rivals on a Bosman free transfer. We didn't even have to pay for him!
What really rubs us up the wrong way with Murray though is his miscalculated decision making on advice from his evidently vindictive agent. To go to press with his desire to leave the club midway through a contract has always left a bitter taste in the mouth, but for him to leak the Palace story to the media the day after we’ve won the league is an incitement to riot. Talk about raining on our parade, Murray squatted down and had a big red and blue shit on it!
There was always a good chance that Murray would opt to follow the money at the end of his contract. Whilst happy if he stayed, he’s certainly not irreplaceable. Unproven at Championship level, his lack of pace may raise a few eyebrows come August, and our faith in Poyet means that if he’s not worth 10 grand a week, he’s really not worth 10 grand a week.
What really sticks is the P word though. Millwall? Ok. Southampton? Whatever. Derby? Meh. Palace? You’re effing kidding me? Losing our top scorer on the back of a Championship to a struggling club in the same division is tough enough, for the motives to be driven by money, disappointing, to our bitterest of rivals, rage inducing.
Well done Glenn, you're a Palace legend and you haven't yet kicked a ball for us!
