Recent Comments
Prev 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 Next
Comments 70351 to 70400:
-
skept.fr at 21:32 PM on 13 November 2011Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
Shouldn't your title be : "Heatwaves Increase With Global Warming"? I suppose that the probability of some "extreme events" like cold waves are decreasing, for the same reason their warm counterpart is increasing. -
OPatrick at 21:16 PM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
A brief, off topic, note on behalf of my wife, who has a particular (professionally motivated) concern about these things: The use of the term "schizophrenic" to describe sceptics who appear to hold contradictory positions is questionable in two ways. FIrstly, although the etymology of 'schizophrenic' is 'split-mind' the condition itself does not involve this - dissociative identity disorder would be a closer match. (Actually, looking at the first paragraph on schizophrenia at Wikipedia the real manifestations of schizophrenia seem to be an even better description of much sceptic thought, but now I'm undermining my second point....) Secondly, the use of any medically recognised condition to describe the behaviour of people who choose to act in these ways is disrepectful to those with genuine mental disorders who cannot control their patterns of thinking. -
RobertLeven at 20:41 PM on 13 November 2011Luxembourgish translation of The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism
Generally speaking, the acceptance to protect the environment in Lxembourg is very high. But when it comes to realize actions against climate change, such as installing wind turbines, discussions arise, including the way to put climate science into doubt. The mentality is reserved. So there's a hidden discussion including a rather unimportant skeptic lobby. I see the promotion of the document in two ways: to prevent arise of wrong and faulty arguments of the skeptic on climate change and to give people information on hand telling them about the many different ways climate change is happening. This is a part of the puzzle to enhance the knowledge here in Luxembourg about climate change, my way to promote further action against climate change and take responsibility. -
John Russell at 20:28 PM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
@Doug H I don't think it helps those seeking action on climate to label all capitalists as being in denial. While it's true that many multinational companies with a vested interest in the energy status quo are actively spinning propaganda to deny climate change, there are many multinationals -- particularly those in food -- who recognise the problems climate change will have on their supply chains in the future. If we are to win this argument we need capitalists to come in from the cold. If you look, for instance, at the insurance industry you'll see that denial is not really a function of being a capitalist. Here in the UK climate change is not so much a left/right thing and in my experience those in denial -- leaving aside the just plain uninformed -- are just as likely to be on the extreme left as the extreme right. Your mainstream Conservative is generally as concerned about this issue as the mainstream Labour supporter. -
alan_marshall at 19:52 PM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Patrick Kelly @ 56 In a post that discusses how nations are acting to mitigate climate change, making reference to the views of decision-makers would seem to be unavoidable. The SkS comments policy does not prohibit discussion of politics per se, but rather "political rants". I committed myself to a nonpartisan presentation, commending both sides of politics when they acknowledge the consensus science. If you are offended by my little aside about a party in denial, I hope that my above acknowledgement @ 57 of real differences on climate change between the Republican candidates, which we have previously examined on SkS, is helpful. -
alan_marshall at 19:33 PM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
… someone who acknowledges climate change will be elected President in 2012 I sure hope so, Eric. I must admit that I have shed no tears for Perry and Cain as they have faltered in their campaigns. Both seem to have a predisposition to deny global warming, whereas Romney does not. While he shifted his position for the Republican primaries, I don’t think he has closed his mind to the science. Still, if you can judge by his books, Obama is passionate about doing something about climate change, with or without the help of congress. He would still get my vote, except that mine doesn’t count! In any event, whoever wins the next presidential election is likely to be faced with undeniable evidence of AGW within their first term if the trend for Arctic ice loss continues. I have used graphs like this one with Australian politicians and believe them to be effective. I think it surprises politicians to learn that the current loss of 286 billion tonnes per year from Greenland alone is more than enough to fill Sydney’s massive harbour 500 times over! -
Patrick Kelly at 19:32 PM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
For a site that pleads a policy of "Poitical comments.... will be deleted," there are an awful lot of political comments posted! -
Lloyd Flack at 16:35 PM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
John Hartz #6, I think Klein does see the antipathy towards environmentalists. And she does see the cornucopian wishful thinking about resources. But she does not see how the denialism is mostly rooted in things that are far stronger in the US than elsewhere. I think unlike most other Western countries, secular conservatism is weak in the US. You mostly have either religious conservatives or you have libertarians. The secular conservatism of most other Western countries has comparatively little difficulty making the compromises and adjustments that are necessary to mitigate climate change. But the religious conservatism of the US seems obsessed with its opponents. It seems to be unwilling to allow itself to see any good in the other side. I wonder whether they really support free enterprise so much as they want to use it a club to beat the secular with. The libertarians are scared of any form of compromise. I think it is because they want a system that is the logical consequence of a few principles. They do not like the idea of a system based of balancing conflicting goals none of which get completely accomplished.. They believe such systems will always collapse so that they are based on only a few principles. They think that a mixed economy must tend towards socialism. Klein is just as self righteous as her opponents and with her aims and sanctimoniousness she fuels the denialists. She is telling them that their fears are correct. She needs marginalizing just as much as they do. -
David Lewis at 15:52 PM on 13 November 2011Sorting out Settled Science from Remaining Uncertainties
A significant additional factor to the ones you mention which is almost as large as the effect of declining solar irradiance is described by Hansen in his Earth’s Energy Imbalance and Implications paper. Hansen calls this the Pinatubo “rebound”. His discussion is in section 12-4, i.e. page 26. “Volcanoes cause a negative planetary energy imbalance during the 1-2 years that the aerosols are present in the stratosphere, followed by a rebound to a positive energy imbalance. This rebound is most clearly defined after the Pinatubo eruption, being noticeable for more than a decade, because of the absence of other volcanoes in that period” I hacked a portion of his Figure 18(f) chart from page 27, and added a red arrow over the decade he’s talking about. This is a second negative impact on the planetary energy imbalance that can be attributed to the eruption of Pinatubo, in addition to the initial -2 W/m2 spike that goes away after a few years. Pinatubo’s “rebound” effect The blue line shows the eruption immediately imposing a bit more than -2 W/m2 forcing on the planetary system which rapidly heads back towards zero as the PInatubo aerosols settle out of the stratosphere. But because -2 W/m2 even over that short period is enough to cause the global ocean to cool slightly, after the Pinatubo aerosols are gone the Earth is left radiating less heat than it otherwise would be radiating to space for a period afterward. This amounts to a slight positive forcing, that as it declines toward zero reduces the planetary energy imbalance. Hansen calls this the “rebound”. He doesn’t supply a number for the peak. My estimate from his chart is that the peak was about 0.16 W/m2. Compare that 0.16 W/m2 to the number Hansen puts on the effect of the cyclical declining solar irradiance during almost the same period , i.e. about 0.14 W/m2. This factor is almost as large. -
Susanne at 15:50 PM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
Thank you people. that's what I call rapid response :) -
Bibliovermis at 15:42 PM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
Susanne, Double-click the video to load the full youtube page. Copy the youtube link. Go to Keep Vid. Download the video and watch it uninterrupted. -
Utahn at 15:33 PM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
Susanne, Barry's more likely to see this on his blog (linked up top). Inquire there, he's very accommodating and could probably email you his PowerPoint slides or something... -
Susanne at 15:23 PM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
I don't suppose there's any chance of a transcript or a podcast? This sounds bang on topic for a group I'm working with, but my crummy wireless broadband choked at about the 3rd minute and wouldn't get through this even at 3am. I usually just sigh and pass videos by, but this time... ???Response:[DB] Over at Barry's blog Anna Haynes has posted her notes from the presentation, if that helps. Look at the November 11, 8:46 pm mark.
-
Doug Hutcheson at 13:35 PM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
John Hartz#6 Thank you for the link to "Capitalism vs the Climate" by Naomi Klein. As a newbie trying to get to the truth, it explains to me why the capitalists of this world are also the deniers, in large part. I had thought their abuse of scientific knowledge was from sheer bloody-mindedness, but now see it is a deeper and more sinister association. No wonder sites like this have such a hard time gaining traction where it counts. Sigh. At least I am developing an informed view of the world, which is different from the view I once held. -
Dennis at 13:19 PM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
This video is excellent. If you can't get a book out in time, at least consider distributing the presentation around. -
Eric (skeptic) at 12:22 PM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
I am surprised to learn we have a second political party here in the USA :) IMO there is little doubt that someone who acknowledges climate change will be elected President in 2012. However the House will not acknowledge it unless the people do (may take a while) and the Senate will not propose effective legislation due to disproportionate farm state representation (it would basically be a big farm bill with some windmills and solar). I would support tax and rebate to gain popular support and remove some of the offset fluff. -
Tristan at 12:03 PM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Romney abandoned his acknowledgment of climate change when it became clear that he wouldn't win the primaries otherwise -
Eric (skeptic) at 11:49 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
Muoncounter, that's a assuming that 1995 cutoff date is meaningful. I could set the cutoff date to 1980 (half way back to 1950) and the ratio is still 62/38. The most accurate description is that there was a lull from 1970 to 1995. -
muoncounter at 11:12 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
Additional evidence of increasing Euro heat. “The reduction in days of extreme cold is due to an increase in the average minimum temperature from 0.5ºC to 1ºC during the analysis period, while for days of extreme heat, the increases in the average maximum temperature were from 0.5ºC to 2ºC” And evidence of more frequent Euro drought. "The magnitude and frequency of the drying that has occurred is too great to be explained by natural variability alone," said Martin Hoerling, Ph.D. of NOAA's Earth System Research Laboratory ... "This is not encouraging news for a region that already experiences water stress, because it implies natural variability alone is unlikely to return the region's climate to normal." These are connected: Dry Winters In North Mediterranean Stoke Hot European Summers From an analysis of meteorological records spanning the past 58 years, Vautard et al. determine that parched conditions around the northern Mediterranean create a mass of anomalously warm, dry air that spreads northward in early summer. -
muoncounter at 10:59 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
Eric#21: "(8/13 is still too close to 50/50 IMO)." That's 62% of the hyperactives in the last 16 years. The remaining 38% are spread over 1950-1995 or 45 years. Even if the ratio was 50/50, that would still be a very asymmetric distribution. -
Eric (skeptic) at 09:35 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
Sphaerica and muoncounter, thanks for the feedback. The 10-15 years of stronger and more frequent storms is still a bit short to draw strong conclusions. My impression from the landfalling storms (links in #15) is that decades were heavily clustered and almost every decade will bring forth a new pattern. But that may be more applicable to landfall than all tropical storms. My view on the frequency vs strength is that increasing strength seems like a no-brainer, but frequency requires both warmth and dynamics, warmth alone is not enough to spawn tropical storms. "Hyperactive" ACE trends (last link in #20) seem to reflect that increase in strength which could still use a little more evidence (8/13 is still too close to 50/50 IMO). -
Rob Honeycutt at 08:13 AM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
Dr Bickmore... IMO you are hitting on exactly the right issue. It's one thing when Chris Mooney writes his book on why conservatives have a hard time accepting science. It falls on deaf ears with regards to the people who most need to understand the challenge. When a conservative such as yourself writes a book on this topic it's a different matter. It means more of the people who need to be reconsidering their position will actually be able to hear what's being said. -
actually thoughtful at 07:22 AM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
I can't help but look at this through the lens of US policy (but very fun to get the insider view on Australian politics). At this point, I base my hopes on the fact that US politics often change on a dime. If we get a hot summer in 2012 (even in a La Nina this could happen) leading up to the elections, and these effective policies in Australia, Europe, Scotland, BC are highlighted - we could end up with a rational policy in the US. As much as Obama has given lip service to climate change, the facts remain that he made health care his primary issue, and completely botched the effort in the US Congress to get cap and trade passed. It could be true that a Romney election is the path to an effective US response, just as only Nixon could go to China. For all the noise in the US - there are only 20% firmly against, and another 20% doubtful. The rest of us have a pretty firm grasp of reality (perhaps only on this issue...). -
Utahn at 07:01 AM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
I can't recommend this enough for a certain moderate or conservative in your life who has been deceived. I think the tone is perfect for that type... -
chuckbot at 07:00 AM on 13 November 2011CO2 Problems: Parallel concerns breed parallel denial
re 25 (chriskoz): My understanding is that basicity is defined by the concentration of OH- ions in the same way that acidity is defined in terms of the concentration of H+ ions. A solution is basic when its basicity outweights its acidity - that is to say, there are more OH- ions than H+. When this happens, the pH is greater than 7 (7 being the pH of a neutral solution.) One thing that I didn't know about before researching OA is that alkalinity and basicity, which I had previously treated as synonymous, are actually distinct concepts. Acidity, alkalinity, and CO2 are related in the ocean, and the Gazeau 2007 paper I mention used this interrelationship to study the effects of high CO2 on shellfish calcification in a way I thought was clever. So I think that it is fine to describe a pH change from 9 to 8 as acidification of a solution that remains basic. Your discussion in #26 seems right on though :) -
chuckbot at 06:38 AM on 13 November 2011CO2 Problems: Parallel concerns breed parallel denial
Images fixed and captioned! re:23 (Bruce) I have thought about a logarithmic time axis - it would be a neat way of comparing events over different time scales. Unfortunately that collapsing of scales can be a conceptual barrier to people who aren't used to thinking with logarithms. For example, I have shown people this image: and even after explaining that the changes are taking place on very different time scales, they still see the current event as being comparable to the 100myear scale oscillations. It would be neat though. I made some fancy backgrounds for some of my graphs and the one I did for the Vostok/Taylor/Law/MLO concentrations was my favorite. I was reading a lot of HP Lovecraft at the time and especially liked the story At the Mountains of Madness, which is set during a geological research expedition to Antarctica. I based it a lot on how that story felt to me -
Riccardo at 06:36 AM on 13 November 2011How to Avoid the Truth About Climate Change
Oh yes, they are definitely "trying too hard to avoid the truth". Good job Barry, thank you for sharing your lecture. -
Steve L at 05:29 AM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
Hi Brent, feel free to quote of course. I'm just a biologist, though, and not someone with any special insight on the underlying physical processes your engineers are interested in or the relevant psychology regarding how that information is (mis)interpreted. My tentative conclusions in comment 1 are based on things I learned here at SkS. But what to do with those conclusions? How do we move on? I'm not sure that a discussion with people whose professional opinions of their opponents include such characterizations is a good way to do it. Your idea to point them here is a good one, if they're interested in science. I think your efforts are laudable. Best of luck. -
Tristan at 05:06 AM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Unlike the USA, China is not burdened by a major political party in denial. Haha. Or a 2nd political party. -
John Hartz at 04:47 AM on 13 November 2011CO2 Problems: Parallel concerns breed parallel denial
"It is a difficult idea to fathom. But the science is clear: Unless we change the way we live, the Earth's coral reefs will be utterly destroyed within our children's lifetimes." Source: "Is the End in Sight for The World’s Coral Reefs?" by J.E.N. Vernon, Yale Environment 360, Dec 6, 2010 To access this informative article, click hereJohn Hartz at 04:25 AM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Suggested reading: “Countries Most Vulnerable To Climate Change Meet In Dhaka, Bangladesh” PlanetSave, Nov 12, 2011 To access this timely article, click here.David Lewis at 04:22 AM on 13 November 2011CO2 Problems: Parallel concerns breed parallel denial
Great article. More people should present data as you have, i.e. in your "historical CO2 trends", and "historical CO2 rate trends" charts which show present trends as vertical lines. On the general subject of ocean acidification, I note that J.E.N. Veron, one of the world's authorities on reefs, has a great book out, "A Reef in Time", which is his plea to the world that the composition of the atmosphere be stabilized so that life in the oceans can be conserved. A few quotes follow. The italics are Veron's: "Acidification is serious because of commitment - a word that will soon be used with increasing frequency in the scientific literature. Commitment embodies the concept of unstoppable inevitability, according to which the nature and health of future environments will be determined not by our actions at some future date but by what is happening today. The oceans, including the ocean depths, respond slowly to atmospheric conditions, whether a temperature increase or a CO2 buildup, which means that the full effects of acidification will take time to develop. Nevertheless, this is only a delay: the factors causing acidification will have irretrievably committed the Earth to the process long before its effects become anywhere near as obvious as those of mass bleaching today." "Ocean acidification must be taken seriously and as a matter of great urgency if the world's oceans are not to be committed to a future of unbridled destruction. It has happened before and it not only can happen again it will happen again unless adequate intergovernmental action is taken on CO2 emissions now. This is one of the most serious (if least well understood) of all predicted environmental changes on Earth, yet so far it has attracted only the most superficial publicity and, to date, only the beginnings of intergovernmental recognition. Preventative action is the same as for global warming and coral bleaching, but the time frame and severity of acidification, as well as its long-term consequences, have no equal." Also: "a lack of international willingness to confront core issues will soon lead to unstoppable processes that could bring on an extinction event the likes of which the world has not seen for 65 milion years". "the effect will, at least in the case of ocean acidification, last for a minimum of hundreds of thousands of years"John Hartz at 04:15 AM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
You will want to check out the Open Climate Network recently created by the World Resources Institute. The Open Climate Network is an independent, international partnership that tracks and reports on the progress of key countries on climate change. OCN seeks to accelerate progress toward the low-emissions future by providing consistent, credible information that enhances accountability both between and within countries.muoncounter at 03:09 AM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
dorlomin#10: "they both seem to hold the idea that uncertainties are under estimated" Wasn't the goal of BEST to reduce the overall uncertainties in the land temperature record? And didn't it show that CA/WattsUp-type criticisms of the more recent record are, on balance, rubbish? Incredibly, Curry can't even admit that the study with her name on it accomplished even that much. Would you want her as a co-author, given that she would feel free to publicly criticize your work after it was done?muoncounter at 02:46 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
Eric #17: "muoncounter's conclusion..." I'm flattered, but I am also hardly a reputable source. One of the more telling points, after considerable back and forth over which metric to use (!), was this graphic: -- source This was an attempt to analyze ACE (accum cyclonic energy), which is purely a wind speed - duration metric, by its components. In addition, there was some discussion of the fact that ACE ignores the large rainfall events like tropical depressions and gives more weight to slow-moving storms. So the context of 'the science isn't settled' was an argument over interpretations of fewer landfalling storms/more named storms and lower ACE/more precipitation. We can now add another datapoint/bone of contention: Of the 25 'above normal' Atlantic seasons (including 2011) shown here, 15 occurred since 1970; of the 13 'hyperactive' seasons, 8 occurred since 1995.Bob Lacatena at 02:02 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
17, Eric, I will concede from the data offered that it makes no statement as to total number of storms. If you wish to take the position that an increase in named storms, hurricane strength storms and hurricane size and intensity all represent an increase in strength, while the total frequency of storms (including those that do not become strong enough to earn names) remains the same, then I will concede that point. Note that I am also well aware that much of the literature argues for the point you are making (an increase in intensity, not frequency) based on simulations. I am simply pointing out that the most recent data appears to contradict this, and I look forward to future attribution studies which will have a larger data pool from which to draw conclusions.Bob Lacatena at 01:54 AM on 13 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
47, bill, Stupendous response. Still chuckling at that one.Bob Lacatena at 01:17 AM on 13 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
17, Eric, No argument on what is settled. It is so early that it's hard to prove a climate change attribution for any extreme weather event, simply because the period is too short and the net change is too small. This is what has been discussed a lot, but is changing day by day as extreme events become more common and more extreme. Picking the signal out of the noise gets easier every year. And it will continue to get a lot worse. I am merely addressing your specific statement of expectation of what is likely to occur. You list heat waves, extreme drought and extreme rainfall as events that are more likely to occur. You suggest that hurricanes will probably be stronger but fewer. I am simply pointing out that evidence to date is to the contrary. It is far from settled, but it also appears that the "stronger but fewer" hypothesis is not, at least for now, supported by observations. In fact, it is strongly refuted by observations of Atlantic storms. Specifically, in the past 16 years, 10 of those years have had 15 named tropical storms or more. The previous 102 years only had 4 such years. 6 of the 10 most intense Atlantic hurricanes in the past 100 years occurred in the past 13 years, 5 of those in the past decade. Using data going back to 1851 (i.e. a span of 160 years) the 9 largest storms by diameter all occurred in the last 15 years. Even if you want to dismiss data prior to the satellite era as unreliable... 9 of the largest in whatever period you want to choose occurred in the last 15 years! Is older data suspect and less accurate, prior to globalization, modern instruments and satellites? It always is. This is an ongoing impediment to climate science. Is the science settled? No. Do observations support the idea that stroms will be stronger but fewer? No. Current observations (over a short period in a world that has not warmed nearly to the point that we have already committed with current CO2 levels) strongly support the idea that at least in the Atlantic we will see both more numerous storms and more powerful storms.dorlomin at 00:41 AM on 13 November 2011The BEST Summary
"and involved Richard Muller and Judith Curry, two scientists quite skeptical of the global warming theory." I think this is a mischaracterisation. I think they are both convinced that CO2 increases temperatures and that the feedbacks will be generally positive, however they both seem to hold the idea that uncertainties are under estimated and take on board the Climate Audit type criticisms of the last 1000s years of paleo.Anne-Marie Blackburn at 00:03 AM on 13 November 2011Luxembourgish translation of The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism
Great work, Robert. What's the situation in Luxembourg like? Do people generally accept the science, or is there much denial?Eric (skeptic) at 23:20 PM on 12 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
Sphaerica, There was a discussion on that last winter and muoncounter's conclusion was " this particular aspect of the science isn't settled". I brought it up again here and muoncounter pointed out in the next post that there are some studies showing an increase, some showing no increase, but no studies showing a decrease. So still somewhat unsettled ATM.RobertLeven at 22:28 PM on 12 November 2011Luxembourgish translation of The Scientific Guide to Global Warming Skepticism
Deeply convinced about the valuable content of this document, I forwarded the information to the press and the media, accompanied by an introduction. Meanwhile, I passed an interview on the most important Radio network for Luxembourg (RTL)to promote the work of the document and of skepticalscience as well, and an article in the biggest newspaper (Luxemburger Wort) was published on last Thursday. An additional interview and presentation on the german speaking RTL radio should follow soon.macwithoutfries at 21:03 PM on 12 November 2011Extreme Events Increase With Global Warming
Rob Painting @10 - very good point, I have missed that reference to 1360; however my experience with deniers is showing that they like to focus on the slightest detail and draw away the debate on it, so it is always better to avoid giving them any such 'distraction point' - like in this case saying " may have been the warmest in more than 500-700 years" instead of "almost 1000 years" - the impact on the reader is the same and deniers will not be able to cling on that point since they already have too much 'invested' in the story with 'little ice age'!quokka at 18:24 PM on 12 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
"Govt doesn't have a great track record of investing in anything!!!"
Really? How about the Snowy Mountains Scheme, the largest engineering project ever undertaken in Australia and frequently cited as an example of civil engineering excellence. Still operated by a wholly state owned corporation and by the far the most important renewable electricity generator in Australia. On the related issue of "picking winners" think about such things as the Pharmaceutical Benefits Scheme whose purpose is to "pick winners" ie effective medical treatments and ensure they are delivered at affordable cost.bill4344 at 17:37 PM on 12 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Phila, I think the word you're looking for is 'Gubmint'. As in 'the gubmint can't do anything right'. It's a little like wondering 'what have the Romans ever done for us?'Phila at 15:40 PM on 12 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
"Govt doesn't have a great track record of investing in anything!!! The amazing thing about this common-as-dirt received wisdom is that much of the energy-related status quo it's defending exists because of government investment. Surely, some folks in the "government can't do anything right" crowd have affordable electricity because of the TVA. Or Hoover Dam. Or the National Reactor Testing Station. Or the UK's Central Electricity Board. Or government coal and oil subsidies. And don't even get me started on the fact that they're issuing these complaints on the Internet. The cognitive dissonance is just astounding.Bob Lacatena at 15:15 PM on 12 November 2011Increase Of Extreme Events With Global Warming (Basic Version)
15, Eric, The graph is of both named storms and hurricanes, the vast majority of which never reach landfall. Is the implication that no one was able to properly notice tropical storms which grew so large they required names -- without the advent of modern technology? Do you have a citation of a source that explicitly makes the case that hurricanes were under-reported prior to some selected date?skywatcher at 15:08 PM on 12 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Nice to see how the goalposts shift, Camburn from "shock value to GDP" to "we should expect to see significant growth in Australian GDP". Does that mean you'll consider the carbon price a failure if Australia's GDP does not grow? As if the carbon price is the only thing that will affect the Aussie economy...muoncounter at 15:08 PM on 12 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
43 Camburn: "the USA's emissions are more than China's." China passed the US in total carbon emissions in 2006, despite the fact that the US GDP is more than 2x that of China. US leads in per capita emissions.Camburn at 14:56 PM on 12 November 2011Australia Legislates an Emissions Trading Scheme
Of course the USA's emissions are more than China's. Look at the GDP difference and it is self explanatory. The political reality in the USA right now is that no new schems of any kind will be put into effect. The hole that has been dug the past 10 years is so deep that we never in fact dig out of this one. We shall see how the Chinese pilot schemes pan out. Remember it is a few cities and provinces. We should expect to see significant growth in Australia's GDP as a result of passage of this.
Prev 1400 1401 1402 1403 1404 1405 1406 1407 1408 1409 1410 1411 1412 1413 1414 1415 Next