The climate change debate continues.

[pmccarthy]

There is nothing wrong with wanting the changes, the arguments for renewable energy are good, but demonising carbon is just a tactic to achieve an outcome.

 

 

[facthunter]

Demonising is your word. I've only talked of cost and availability. . I trust science and the truth.. What's really happening is more obvious by the day if you care to look. Nev

 

 

[Bruce]

Yes, a tiny amount of CO2 can indeed cause the sort of change of a few degrees. This is a tiny change as the solar system operates between -260 and plus 5,800 degrees. So a 5 degree change is only significant for certain life-forms which require very constant temperatures.

 

Under the "do nothing" scenario, we are looking at 5 degrees in our children's lifetimes. And we are certainly getting the do nothing outcome, gosh Australia just voted for it.

 

 

[Yenn]

It may be only a small change in temperature, but todays headline news on the ABC, was that Brisbane will be too hot to live in in 2050. Don't tell me that is just an ABC beat up. I already know.

 

What is obvious is that the rainfall patterns are changing. We did not get a wet this year and can only hope for some rain at the end of the year. by that time the fodder for cattle will be well and truly depleted and the topsoil will be ready to take an overseas holiday if the westerlies blow well.

 

A lot of locals are destocking due to lack of water and that has long term consequences for agriculture in the future as well as for the national economy.

 

Never mind all we need to do is dig up more coal to bring in money from overseas.

 

 

[Marty_d]

Climate change isn't even an argument in the UK. Surprisingly over there it's the conservatives who have led the push to do something about it. Even the Iron Maiden herself (who was a qualified engineer) was pretty strong on climate change even back in 1989. Now the UK has a scientific board that advises government on what needs to happen next, and you know what? They don't argue with it, they just get on with working out the best way to implement the recommendations. We should be so lucky.

 

Of course, you know what the major difference is... they stopped digging coal out of the ground while we still seem to think it's a good idea. Therefore there's no Minerals Council or mine owners buying up politicians.

 

The other thing is that they're honest about the costs of doing nothing, whereas our politicians aren't. Ours rabbit on about the increase in power prices but never talk about the economic consequences should warming pass 2 degrees.

 

Brexit may currently be making them look like a pack of fools but at least they do the right thing when it comes to climate change.

 

 

[spacesailor]

The coal in Britain is all imported.

 

All mining workers are trained overseas.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[octave]

The coal in Britain is all imported.All mining workers are trained overseas.

 

spacesailor

 

Britain has massively reduced its dependence on coal.

 

Coal consumption 1970-2017 | UK Statistic

 

 

[spacesailor]

Over priced imports

 

spacesailor

 

 

[facthunter]

Thatcher (Not generally my favourite person) did the sums and considered the UK coal industry not competitive. That situation has not been seriously challenged I'm led to believe. Coming from a line of Northern England/Scottish coal miners and knowing how long they (don't/ didn't) live, It's NOT a job you should fret much over losing.. It's Dirty, Dangerous and you don't make old bones and eventually with underground mining you get lots of subsidence and building restrictions applying to the affected area.. Open cut is no better. and the damage is much more obvious untill they erect Kms of High Fences so you don't notice it, but the dust with heavy metals concentrated in it from continuous watering from the same source goes for a Hundred Kms or more. . Nev

 

 

[Bruce]

I wonder if England is more concerned about climate change than we or the US because those English are still quite feudal. Of all the systems of government, feudalism is obviously the one with the longest time horizon. Yes it has downsides, like class hostilities, but if you inherited your wealth from your ancestors, you should have more regard for your descendants than if you were a self made billionaire.

 

 

[facthunter]

Both sides of the political spectrum accept the SCIENCE. Here it's used for scoring political points and appeasing donors who love coal and it's profits. IF they pay for the damage there wouldn't BE any profits. . Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

... if you inherited your wealth from your ancestors, you should have more regard for your descendants ...

Not too long ago the Romans were in a similar situation. Waves of displaced people moved in, buying up land or squatting. Pretty soon they overran the empire and inheritance laws went out the window.

 

 

[octave]

Interesting video on direct air capture technology

 

 

[octave]

In his speech at a business breakfast in London, the boss of the world’s largest mining company described climate change as “indisputable” and escalating towards a crisis.

 

“Previous events when CO2 was added to the atmosphere more slowly and sometimes in similar amounts show us what may happen if we do not act. These events coincided with mass extinctions and major rises in sea level,” he said.

 

Mr Mackenzie said society had released greenhouse gases at rates much faster than at any other time in the geological past.

 

“The evidence is abundant: Global warming is indisputable,” he said.

 

Mining boss warns of ‘mass extinctions’

 

 

[spacesailor]

"“Previous events when CO2 was added to the atmosphere more slowly and sometimes in similar amounts show us what may happen if we do not act."

 

AND still we burn our undergrowth !.

 

Can't we mulch it (cut & mulch).

 

How many hospitalised people will have to suffer "smoke inhalation"

 

, AS well as more carbon added to the already polluted atmosphere.

 

I watched (TV) in dismay, all the long grass being burnt, instead of "Harvested " for drought relief. ( the Long Paddock )

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

"“Previous events when CO2 was added to the atmosphere more slowly and sometimes in similar amounts show us what may happen if we do not act."AND still we burn our undergrowth !.

 

Can't we mulch it (cut & mulch).

 

How many hospitalised people will have to suffer "smoke inhalation"

 

, AS well as more carbon added to the already polluted atmosphere.

 

I watched (TV) in dismay, all the long grass being burnt, instead of "Harvested " for drought relief. ( the Long Paddock )

 

spacesailor

Nice ideas in theory, Spacey. I totally agree that it's better to mulch rather than burn (most of our soils sure could do with more carbon).

 

Unfortunately, it's not feasible in our current economy. Even if all our unemployed were set to work in community work teams we wouldn't make much of a dent in it.

 

Much of the hazard-reduction burning you seem to be referring to is in rough terrain totally unsuited to any sort of harvesting machinery.

 

Fire is a legitimate tool of pastoralists, especially given many of our ecosystems have had to adapt to fire used by humans for tens of thousands of years. One example from the east coast is bladey grass. It's only palatable for animals early in its growth phase- after old growth is burned off.

 

 

[spacesailor]

Which puts that dreaded Carbon back were we Don't want it.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

Agreed, but that’s the natural carbon cycle- it isn’t carbon locked up eons ago as fossil fuel.

 

Your concerns about the health effects of smoke are valid, but we humans have to manage the fire risks surrounding our settlements.

 

Which is the greater danger: seasonal smoke from hazard reduction, or catastrophic firestorms?

 

 

[facthunter]

Soils incorporating charcoal are extremely fertile. Australia has lost by erosion much of it's (small amount) of topsoil and organic matter in it by the way we plough it up to get rid of weeds.. Nev

 

 

[Yenn]

Interesting news on Adani yesterday, it seems someone has come up with the idea that Adani will never pay company tax in Australia, as they are too fat in debt to the parent company in India. Don't tell anyone but that was so obvious that even I predicted it ages ago on another post on this site.

 

 

[facthunter]

You are not alone. If ever there's an incident (spill etc) on the reef you won't get a cent out of that Mob. It's structured offshore (Caymans ) so it can't be touched. Glencore have never paid any tax here.. Nev

 

 

[Old Koreelah]

...and the politicians, lobbyists and media who sold us this toxic lemon will refuse to take any responsibility.

 

 

[spacesailor]

YOU Know who the pollies are.

 

SACK them at the next election.

 

They have to be held responsible by their constituents.

 

spacesailor

 

 

[facthunter]

People have been voting for ever (because it's compulsory) If it wasn't ,it might be like the voting in RAAus elections.. An anti corruption function has to be established and madeto work. Where there's FRAUD the LAW should act., firmly. You pinch some insignificant article at the supermarket and you're Gone. White collar crime goes on at the top end and is even tax deductible and nothing stops them, most times. and getting caught is seen as the problem. People in the know are exempt from being caught.. Not What you know it's who you know, you know. Nev

 

 

[spacesailor]

"Where there's FRAUD the LAW should act.,"

 

12 months jail, for the X mayor !.

 

You would get a lot more jail time for getting One extra payment off the Dole service.

 

The Hierarchy looks after their own.

 

spacesailor

 

.