Global Warming

[Nudga]

Thanks sproggy.
I've given it a like along with GG.

Hound? GG?

You'll have to explain that one.

Also, Hound asked you to name the racists you insist are on this forum. You haven't replied yet.

Somebody keeps implying that I am right wing, which to me in old money means being racist.
I am not racist, I am not right leaning or left leaning, I am not aligned with any political party at all.

I think after 4 1/2k posts Nudga, if someone hasn't yet worked out that you are completely unique and away in a world of your own - then they can't have been a member here for very long!

I have seen maybe a couple of racist posts over the years that were clamped on pretty quick by the mods. Certainly nobody posting in this thread (under the user names they have now).

Politely put Wilts, but I can assure you, away from this forum I am not in my own world. There are quite a few people with views similar to mine.

And no, I don't like David Ike and I am not a flat earther.

[drfchound]

Thanks sproggy.
I've given it a like along with GG.

Hound? GG?

You'll have to explain that one.

Also, Hound asked you to name the racists you insist are on this forum. You haven't replied yet.

Somebody keeps implying that I am right wing, which to me in old money means being racist.
I am not racist, I am not right leaning or left leaning, I am not aligned with any political party at all.

I think after 4 1/2k posts Nudga, if someone hasn't yet worked out that you are completely unique and away in a world of your own - then they can't have been a member here for very long!

I have seen maybe a couple of racist posts over the years that were clamped on pretty quick by the mods. Certainly nobody posting in this thread (under the user names they have now).

Maybe that is why our friend is unable to back up his claim that there are racists on the forum.

[danumdon]

The fact is, UK oil is sold on the international market and then we’ll buy it back, the only people that benefit are the Oil Companies and their shareholders

So you neglect to include any one who has a workplace pension scheme, that could also include you!

Does it really matter where UK oil is sold? if you go right back to the start of north sea oil, the UK government decided it would not extract the resources itself but issue licences for Oil companies to extract the oil with royalty payments to the Uk (unlike the Norwegians) Once that decision had been made it made minimal difference, as in any business the contractor takes on the risk and will have to stand any costs and losses as well as the profits.

[Filo]

The fact is, UK oil is sold on the international market and then we’ll buy it back, the only people that benefit are the Oil Companies and their shareholders

So you neglect to include any one who has a workplace pension scheme, that could also include you!

Does it really matter where UK oil is sold? if you go right back to the start of north sea oil, the UK government decided it would not extract the resources itself but issue licences for Oil companies to extract the oil with royalty payments to the Uk (unlike the Norwegians) Once that decision had been made it made minimal difference, as in any business the contractor takes on the risk and will have to stand any costs and losses as well as the profits.

Yes it does matter when the Govt are telling us this will make us less reliant on overseas gas and oil, the fact is it will make no difference because as soon as it is sold on international markets, it becomes overseas gas and oil, sold back to us at a higher price

[danumdon]

The fact is, UK oil is sold on the international market and then we’ll buy it back, the only people that benefit are the Oil Companies and their shareholders

So you neglect to include any one who has a workplace pension scheme, that could also include you!

Does it really matter where UK oil is sold? if you go right back to the start of north sea oil, the UK government decided it would not extract the resources itself but issue licences for Oil companies to extract the oil with royalty payments to the Uk (unlike the Norwegians) Once that decision had been made it made minimal difference, as in any business the contractor takes on the risk and will have to stand any costs and losses as well as the profits.

Yes it does matter when the Govt are telling us this will make us less reliant on overseas gas and oil, the fact is it will make no difference because as soon as it is sold on international markets, it becomes overseas gas and oil, sold back to us at a higher price

As things stand and until we have a secure and reliable source of energy that's not carbon based we will always need oil, now why should we beggar ourselves in the meantime by closing down our production, we have to source it anyway, so we may as well keep producing as this makes the state money, as things stand it doesn't make us any less reliant on overseas oil but that's the system we have. If it was left to someone like Starmer we would not even have the income from the licence royalties to live off. So increased carbon footprint to go along with less revenue.

So, you never did answer my original point, is it not a fact that a great many pension schemes have interests in gas and oil, which are a benefit to the holders of these company schemes?

[Colin C No.3]

You’re missing the point with all due respect.

Sunak said the UK would benefit from the extraction of more North Sea oil & gas as “We wouldn’t be reliant on purchasing oil & gas from abroad”.

That’s an absolute lie.

Any oil & gas we extract is sent abroad ready for us to ‘buy it back’ which he knows well & good is the case.

[glosterred]

Another reason for this years high temperatures

https://www.americanthinker.com/blog/2023/07/what_nasa_and_the_european_space_agency_are_admitting_but_the_media_are_failing_to_report_about_our_current_heat_wave.html

[i_ateallthepies]

"The current heat wave is being relentlessly blamed on increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but there is a much more plausible explanation, one that is virtually endorsed by two of the world's leading scientific organizations."


So, two of the world's leading scientific organisations 'virtually' endorsed it... sounds like clickbait for the hard of thinking.

[scawsby steve]

OK, guys, I'm a bit puzzled here. Apparently, environmentalists want "net zero" by 2030, but Sunak is saying 2050.

How on Earth is net zero achievable at all, whilst there is an aviation industry, and people are driving about in cars that aren't all electric?

I understand that hydrogen powered planes are supposed to be the future, but that would take decades, at an astronomical cost.

[Sprotyrover]

OK, guys, I'm a bit puzzled here. Apparently, environmentalists want "net zero" by 2030, but Sunak is saying 2050.

How on Earth is net zero achievable at all, whilst there is an aviation industry, and people are driving about in cars that aren't all electric?

I understand that hydrogen powered planes are supposed to be the future, but that would take decades, at an astronomical cost.

You missing the fact that Electric Cars need, electricity and we need to be able to produce it by not burning fossil fuels.

[Nudga]

Plus electric cars are shite, I've got one and we can't really go far without having to top it up somewhere and that's if the electric points are available or even working.

[drfchound]

I know we can try to do our bit but that will be tiny in the wider scheme of things unless the world gets the USA, China and India to comply.

[scawsby steve]

So it seems we're all in agreement that net zero is unachievable. With that in mind, and given that the doom and gloom merchants are now talking about "global boiling", how long have we got left? Will we make it to the end of the season?(hopefully a promotion season).

Well we got through the Armageddon of Covid, and the Armageddon of Putin's nuclear threats. Maybe we'll get through this one.

[Bristol Red Rover]

So it seems we're all in agreement that net zero is unachievable. With that in mind, and given that the doom and gloom merchants are now talking about "global boiling", how long have we got left? Will we make it to the end of the season?(hopefully a promotion season).

Well we got through the Armageddon of Covid, and the Armageddon of Putin's nuclear threats. Maybe we'll get through this one.

So long as we strap in, nose to the grindstone, keep focusing on all the armageddons, the world will keep on turning, or will for some.

[ncRover]

"The current heat wave is being relentlessly blamed on increasing levels of carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, but there is a much more plausible explanation, one that is virtually endorsed by two of the world's leading scientific organizations."


So, two of the world's leading scientific organisations 'virtually' endorsed it... sounds like clickbait for the hard of thinking.

Water vapour is a very potent greenhouse gas and is often overlooked.

The 2022 Hunga Tonga underwater volcanic eruption increased the upper atmosphere water mass by about 15%. Huge volcanic eruptions on land usually block the sun and release sulphur dioxide to cause cooling.

This is getting looked in to before getting confirmed. (The climate is extremely complicated with many more variables than co2).

2023 is also the start of a new El Niño (Pacific Ocean warm phase) after a rare triple dip La Niña (Pacific Ocean cold phase) so there is lots of energy stored in the climate system. This along with Tonga and co2 emissions should of course make 2023 beat 2016 to the warmest year on record yet, let’s see.

The emergency co2 global warming signal showed in the 1970s. Warming stopped 1940s-1970s. Was the warming 1850-1940 natural variability? Because the Little Ice Age was the coldest climate phase of the entire Holocene. The end of this period is used as the climate benchmark today.

Historical accounts don’t really line up with the hockey stick graph. The Vikings harvested barley in Greenland in the Medieval Warm Period. Europe went through a very productive period here.

During the Little Ice Age, the River Thames would freeze over enough to have fairs on. The extreme weather lead to crop failures, famine and helped the Black Death to spread in malnourished populations.

The early Holocene post ice age melt was 1-2C warmer than today. The river Nile had 3 times it’s volume then and the Sahara desert was greener. Humans survived that as well as the 10C temperature swings of the Younger Dryas prior to that.

Anyone preaching the end of the world in this technological age with solutions on the horizon is hard of thinking. History also shows that not every carbon emission leads to warming. The whole world doesn’t have to get to zero.

The global burned area has also trended down in recent decades so the world isn’t “on fire”.

[belton rover]

Just a quick point on the Thames freezing over: that was mainly because some of the bridges had much smaller arches, thus slowing the current down between them, making that part of the river more susceptible to freezing over. The Thames never froze over where there were no bridges.

[BillyStubbsTears]

OK, guys, I'm a bit puzzled here. Apparently, environmentalists want "net zero" by 2030, but Sunak is saying 2050.

How on Earth is net zero achievable at all, whilst there is an aviation industry, and people are driving about in cars that aren't all electric?

I understand that hydrogen powered planes are supposed to be the future, but that would take decades, at an astronomical cost.

Because we can remove CO2 from the atmosphere. Net zero doesn't mean producing zero C02. The "net" is the clue. It means removing as much every year as we produce.

Its not hard to fathom. You have a net zero effect on your toenails if you cut them by as much as they grow.

[albie]

Sunak in the wrong place on all this....I wonder why?
https://www.thelondoneconomic.com/politics/sunaks-family-firm-signed-a-billion-dollar-deal-with-bp-before-pm-opened-new-north-sea-licences-353690/

Oops a daisy!

[Not Now Kato]

The climate can be a funny thing, look at the weather in Europe circa 1846/7 caused food shortages right across Europe and revolutions in Germany, France, Austro Hungary. One thing is for sure our contribution is minimal compared to China, India and the US,plus Indonesia and the Philippines and many other developing countries, they argue that we had our chance back in the days of the Industrial Revolution and now they are entitled to do the same!  They see it as a justification for their excessive Carbon footprint , well if the British had known about it A hundred plus years ago they would have done something, blaming us for their own polluting ways and using it as an excuse to keep polluting is a bit ‘Tardy’ I’m my humble opinion!

Do you have a source for that assertion?

Here you go ,one of many similar https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj3iqbxzLmAAxXEQUEAHThpAHMQFnoECDgQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.brookings.edu%2Farticles%2Fit-is-unfair-to-push-poor-countries-to-reach-zero-carbon-emissions-too-early%2F&usg=AOvVaw2znNHzKzGp5m_8YXYTNOGr&opi=89978449

Nowhere in that excellent article do any of those countries say what you claimed they did.... namely "China, India and the US,plus Indonesia and the Philippines and many other developing countries, they argue that we had our chance back in the days of the Industrial Revolution and now they are entitled to do the same!"
 
Though it does quite clearly indicate that this government has consistently failed to meet it's target for annual CO2 reduction in the UK!

[River Don]

The climate can be a funny thing, look at the weather in Europe circa 1846/7 caused food shortages right across Europe and revolutions in Germany, France, Austro Hungary. One thing is for sure our contribution is minimal compared to China, India and the US,plus Indonesia and the Philippines and many other developing countries, they argue that we had our chance back in the days of the Industrial Revolution and now they are entitled to do the same!  They see it as a justification for their excessive Carbon footprint , well if the British had known about it A hundred plus years ago they would have done something, blaming us for their own polluting ways and using it as an excuse to keep polluting is a bit ‘Tardy’ I’m my humble opinion!

Do you have a source for that assertion?

Here you go ,one of many similar https://www.google.co.uk/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&ved=2ahUKEwj3iqbxzLmAAxXEQUEAHThpAHMQFnoECDgQAQ&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.brookings.edu%2Farticles%2Fit-is-unfair-to-push-poor-countries-to-reach-zero-carbon-emissions-too-early%2F&usg=AOvVaw2znNHzKzGp5m_8YXYTNOGr&opi=89978449

Nowhere in that excellent article do any of those countries say what you claimed they did.... namely "China, India and the US,plus Indonesia and the Philippines and many other developing countries, they argue that we had our chance back in the days of the Industrial Revolution and now they are entitled to do the same!"
 
Though it does quite clearly indicate that this government has consistently failed to meet it's target for annual CO2 reduction in the UK!

China has released more CO2 in just the last 8 years than the UK has in the 220 years since the industrial revolution. That's a  reflection of the sheer scale of Chinese industry now and the global market it serves.

The argument that you've had your fun now it's our time to have ours is wearing thin.

[BillyStubbsTears]

How much have they released per person? And how does that compare to the countries of the West?

[River Don]

How much have they released per person? And how does that compare to the countries of the West?

A quick Google suggests China is releasing around 7.5 metric tons per person now. The UK just over 5 metric tons per person. That's according to Statista. Com

[BillyStubbsTears]

How much have they released per person? And how does that compare to the countries of the West?

A quick Google suggests China is releasing around 7.5 metric tons per person now. The UK just over 5 metric tons per person. That's according to Statista. Com

I mean how much have they emitted per person throughout history.

[River Don]

Ah, I suspect on that basis BST, China will be far behind.

If they feel they are entitled to match the worst of Western emmisions in history, which I expect will be the USA, then we really will be facing runaway climate change and we all lose.

[i_ateallthepies]

If UK businesses had continued buying from UK manufacturers instead of outsourcing just about everything to China then the comparison would be much more realistic.

[albie]

How much UK consumption is dependent upon imports from China?

So is the carbon emitted completely their issue, or should we accept some of the debt because we are the end users?

[River Don]

How much UK consumption is dependent upon imports from China?

So is the carbon emitted completely their issue, or should we accept some of the debt because we are the end users?

China is the workshop of the world and much of the demand for their products is coming from the West. So yes, it would be fair to say these figures are distorted and the west needs to shoulder more of the responsibility.

But still, China has become the worlds biggest polluter. We can't afford to just let that pass anymore because proportionately we did worse much of it at a time when climate change wasn't so widely understood. Physics doesn't care about human politics.

[albie]

Article from George Monbiot on the Sunakkery going on with carbon capture;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/01/rishi-sunak-north-sea-planet-climate-crisis-plutocrats

Who stands to benefit from distraction and delay?

[big fat yorkshire pudding]

How much UK consumption is dependent upon imports from China?

So is the carbon emitted completely their issue, or should we accept some of the debt because we are the end users?

Spot on, sending our emissions abroad is commonplace clearly.  It should be calculated and based on the actual end user.

[wilts rover]

Article from George Monbiot on the Sunakkery going on with carbon capture;
https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/aug/01/rishi-sunak-north-sea-planet-climate-crisis-plutocrats

Who stands to benefit from distraction and delay?

Yeah, but China...