Carbon pricing to start July 1. 2012

[Mornnb]

Originally Posted by manrush

Yeah, exactly. Attacking the greens and the environmental movement is essentially blaming the victim for the crime.

What the. It's a political movement. Blaming the movement for having ineffective political strategies is not blaming the victim, it's blaming the culprits.

[Kelli]

^Environment is the ultimate wicked problem, it seems to me that you've no concept of that to be saying such things. While you're thinking of just climate change, thinking it's a simple bit of compromise and a bit of time that will solve a standalone issue, environmentalists are thinking of all the manifest and inter-related issues.

Also, compromising on environment is like saying to someone that needs a minimum of 100mg of a drug to survive; I'll give you 80mg so I can have 20mg, because it gives me a bit of a buzz and why are you complaining, when you get the vast majority of it?

So, while I acknowledge that compromise is a part of the existing political system, nothing really systemic will be achieved that way, especially at the pace required, it's all just window dressing.

[Mornnb]

Originally Posted by Kelli

^Environment is the ultimate wicked problem, it seems to me that you've no concept of that to be saying such things. While you're thinking of just climate change, thinking it's a simple bit of compromise and a bit of time that will solve a standalone issue, environmentalists are thinking of all the manifest and inter-related issues.

I understand this, but politics is a journey where you take one step at a time towards the final goal. You can't go on a journey if you expect to get to the end all in one step. The environmentalist moment does not seem to understand this, they push for everyone to happen at once. Well politics doesn't work that way so nothing gets done.

Also, compromising on environment is like saying to someone that needs a minimum of 100mg of a drug to survive; I'll give you 80mg so I can have 20mg, because it gives me a bit of a buzz and why are you complaining, when you get the vast majority of it?

No it's more like this. You can't have 100mg now, but I can give you 20mg today and 80mg in a week. The Greens will say, no it's 100mg today or nothing! So the patient gets nothing and dies.
You're supposed to take the victories you can get and then push for more!

So, while I acknowledge that compromise is a part of the existing political system, nothing really systemic will be achieved that way, especially at the pace required, it's all just window dressing.

But that's my point, it's not window dressing but the first steps towards the required more complete solution.
I consider myself an environmentalist, but I am at despair with how the movement is handling the politics.

[Kelli]

Originally Posted by Mornnb

I understand this, but politics is a journey where you take one step at a time towards the final goal. You can't go on a journey if you expect to get to the end all in one step. The environmentalist moment does not seem to understand this, they push for everyone to happen at once. Well politics doesn't work that way so nothing gets done.

Not quite true, they've chipped away at many things over the years. Not to mention all the issues they've mainstreamed, even though they are bastardised by the time they get there.

Originally Posted by Mornnb

No it's more like this. You can't have 100mg now, but I can give you 20mg today and 80mg in a week. The Greens will say, no it's 100mg today or nothing! So the patient gets nothing and dies.

I see what you're saying, but in reality it's never the 100mg really needed.

Originally Posted by Mornnb

You're supposed to take the victories you can get and then push for more!

Who's rule is that though? I don't like it.

Originally Posted by Mornnb

But that's my point, it's not window dressing but the first steps towards the required more complete solution.

I consider myself an environmentalist, but I am at despair with how the movement is handling the politics.

They supported it in the end. Are there other things you think they're not handling?

I'm not completely defending it anyway, there are a lot of less than ideal people in that movement as in others.

[Kelli]

^Watching Pillars of the Earth and this saying popped up 'politics is a bargain between beggars'. Seemed apt somehow .

[manrush]

Originally Posted by Mornnb

What the. It's a political movement. Blaming the movement for having ineffective political strategies is not blaming the victim, it's blaming the culprits.

It's not the environmentalists which have the ineffective political strategies. Rather, you should be pointing your finger at our critics, not at us.

[AndyGM]

?? That makes no sense. It is clear that the environmentalists political strategies have been beaten by those of the deniers.

Given that the environmentalists have a huge weight of scientific evidence on their side, as well as the support of most economists, it is pretty clear that there has been a failure in the political approach.

You don't learn by blaming others for your failings.

[3/379]

Originally Posted by AndyGM

?? That makes no sense. It is clear that the environmentalists political strategies have been beaten by those of the deniers.

Given that the environmentalists have a huge weight of scientific evidence on their side, as well as the support of most economists, it is pretty clear that there has been a failure in the political approach.

You don't learn by blaming others for your failings.

Evidence.......like no warming for 16 years despite evil CO2 continuing to increase..ooops like thats a rather large elephant in the room.

Manipulated and bastardized temp records and junk modelling doesn't equal scientific rigor based on empirical evidence. Never has and never will.

Environmentalism is a popular cloak for other political purposes, surely everyone knows that now???

[AndyGM]

Um, ok...

Well, I've been put in my place by reasoned and objective argument based on irrefutable evidence.

I guess I'll have to change my views on climate change now.

[MelbourneOnTheRise]

Originally Posted by AndyGM

Um, ok...

Well, I've been put in my place by reasoned and objective argument based on irrefutable evidence.

I guess I'll have to change my views on climate change now.

YEah! Now tell us where you're hiding Bigfoot and the Loch Ness Monster you barbarian leftist conspirator!

Your days of secretly advancing the Globalist Elite Somethingness Agenda to defeat the noble Aryan race are over!!

We all know that global warming's just another loony Left wing conspiracy, like gravity, evolution and women's rights.

(This post was a satirical amalgam of several of this forum's colourful right wing characters.)

[redbaron_012]

How come brains of those who believe that humans cause Climate Change automatically think those that don't are 'Deniers' When they should look a bit deeper and see that most people think there is Climate Change and Humans do contibute but we are only a small cog in the wheel of earth History and the world will do what it wants and we will habitate this planet while we can adapt to the changes then one day we wont so go extinct like everything else that came before us..............Oh but then I forgot the devine right of us being numero uno...........everything in the universe was put there for us.......I should wash my mouth out!

[Bullswool]

Originally Posted by 3/379

Evidence.......like no warming for 16 years despite evil CO2 continuing to increase..ooops like thats a rather large elephant in the room.

Manipulated and bastardized temp records and junk modelling doesn't equal scientific rigor based on empirical evidence. Never has and never will.

Environmentalism is a popular cloak for other political purposes, surely everyone knows that now???

2012 is set to the be the warmest year on record.

[manrush]

Denialists are getting more out of touch with reality, as the years go by.

[theskier]

Originally Posted by Bullswool

2012 is set to the be the warmest year on record.

Its actually expected to be the 9th hottest year on record.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/environmen...st-year-record

[AndyGM]

There is no hard evidence to show that annual average temperatures vary around a trend.

Therefore I can safely say that the world is now cooling, given the fact this year is only the 9th warmest on record

[theskier]

Originally Posted by AndyGM

There is no hard evidence to show that annual average temperatures vary around a trend.

Therefore I can safely say that the world is now cooling, given the fact this year is only the 9th warmest on record

its depends on how many years you use as the rolling average temperature in the trend line. If you use the last 10 years, then the trend is probably one of cooling, however the last 20 would clearly show warming

[theskier]

The question we all want answered - Does human Farting significantly contribute to global warming?

Yes it does, but only by a very small amount. Here’s some fart facts:

The average human farts 30 times a day (whether we admit it or not) and the average fart is 25cc, so that’s 750cc of fart per person per day.

Most fart gas is actually nitrogen, depending on the diet then only about 10% is methane, it’s this component which is the greenhouse gas.

10% of 750cc means that each person produces about 75cc of methane per day and with a density of 0.717kg/m³ this equates to about 0.0538g of daily methane.

As greenhouse gases go methane is 23 times as effective as carbon dioxide, so that 0.0538g of CH4 has the same potential to cause warming as 1.237g of CO2.

Over the course of a whole year a person would produce some 20g of methane / 450g of CO2 equivalence, this would have the same effect on warming the atmosphere as driving an average car for two miles.

With everyone on the planet busy farting 30 times a day we collectively produce the equivalent of 3.076 billion kg of CO2 per year. It might sound a lot but it’s about one fourteen thousandth of the total human emissions of greenhouse gases (measured as CO2 equivalence)

If you want to convert that into the actual effect on global temperatures then human farts have warmed the atmosphere by about 0.0000571°C. Then you need to factor in that methane has a relatively short atmospheric residence period (12 years) so the long-term effect is smaller, in the order of 0.00002°C.

A cow on the other hand is completely different, they’re basically methane factories on legs.

[Mornnb]

Originally Posted by theskier

A cow on the other hand is completely different, they’re basically methane factories on legs.

Indeed. We could do a lot to reduce emissions by swapping beef for kangaroo meat. Kangaroos are a more efficient animal.
So we need electric cars, nuclear power and kangaroos.

[AndyGM]

That kangaroo thing is actually a bit of a myth.

Yes, one kangaroo produces only a fraction of the methane of a cow, but then they only produce a fraction of the meat as well.

If you measured animal emissions per kg of actual meat produced, rather than per animal, the difference is actually a lot smaller.

[AndyGM]

Originally Posted by theskier

its depends on how many years you use as the rolling average temperature in the trend line. If you use the last 10 years, then the trend is probably one of cooling, however the last 20 would clearly show warming

Oh, do we use statistical methods here?

What do you think is the right trend to use for climate?