Politics Climate Change Paradox (cont in part 2)

[Dogs_R_Us]

Thanks buddy for correcting my embarrassing spelling error, however it is most definitely a causal fallacy (is that better?)

-> Obama claims climate change is real
-> Obama does not act like climate change is real
-> therefore climate change is not real

Happy to walk you through this one but the actions of Obama have no bearing on whether climate change is real. That's your fallacy.

I don’t make those links so there’s another fallacy. I haven’t said anywhere that climate change is not real. My position is that doing something about it is problematic. But these are the people who have a public voice and can draw attention to the issue due to their popularity. Point 2 is disappointing, wouldn’t you agree? No one will take any notice of you and me, but influential people like him could be doing so much more to swing philosophy into action. We’re constantly hearing “We must do more!” People like him could be showing the way.

 

[Nuggs Bunny]

I don’t make those links so there’s another fallacy. I haven’t said anywhere that climate change is not real. My position is that doing something about it is problematic. But these are the people who have a public voice and can draw attention to the issue due to their popularity. Point 2 is disappointing, wouldn’t you agree? No one will take any notice of you and me, but influential people like him could be doing so much more to swing philosophy into action. We’re constantly hearing “We must do more!” People like him could be showing the way.

I don't know what you want me to say to this one, I'm really not sure whether Obama lives like climate change is a hoax or if he just wants to buy a seaside property for a few years, or if he's really bullish on the coastal reclamation industry if seas start to rise. The only thing I can say is that I don't really pay any attention to what Obama does and not really sure what point there is including him or Gore a discussion as to whether climate change is real. For a start, they're both exceedingly wealthy for supposed heroes of the left and the rich have a long history of being able to get away with holding themselves to a lesser standard than everybody else. More than happy to legislate against things like private jet usage to force those who can to more, to do more if that's what your angling towards though.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Nah Fadge and I are cool, there's no tears here.

Yeah you's are cool, but me reckons that you discredit Fadges standpoint coz of the potting and vice versa.

Fair to say there'd be some in debates, and not just BF that'd be like (yeah nah, resorts to name calling, can't have valid points)

 

[mcnulty]

I don't know what you want me to say to this one, I'm really not sure whether Obama lives like climate change is a hoax or if he just wants to buy a seaside property for a few years, or if he's really bullish on the coastal reclamation industry if seas start to rise. The only thing I can say is that I don't really pay any attention to what Obama does and not really sure what point there is including him or Gore a discussion as to whether climate change is real. For a start, they're both exceedingly wealthy for supposed heroes of the left and the rich have a long history of being able to get away with holding themselves to a lesser standard than everybody else. More than happy to legislate against things like private jet usage to force those who can to more, to do more if that's what your angling towards though.

Obama nor Gore nor Flannery nor Thunberg. These are are silly straw men. Most sensible people who believe in action to mitigate the effects of climate change couldn’t GAF what these people have to say.

 

[Leeda]

Yeah you's are cool, but me reckons that you discredit Fadges standpoint coz of the potting and vice versa.

Fair to say there'd be some in debates, and not just BF that'd be like (yeah nah, resorts to name calling, can't have valid points)

nah you are just bewildered by anti histamine... it gets in your nose and makes a smarting sensation...

 

[adogsfan5]

NSW plan to offer emissions offsets with car registration sends wrong message, critics say | Carbon offsetting | The Guardian

It ‘could undermine people’s intent to find ways to reduce emissions from driving. Offsets don’t really reduce emissions,’ climate scientist says

amp.theguardian.com

 

[rank and file]

Sad to see NZ entering the tropics and will now get on the map.



Big cyclone

 

[aj1992]

Still waiting for Al Gore's predictions from that stupid movie of his.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Homes and businesses in every state on Australia’s eastern seaboard are at risk of electricity shortages from 2027 as looming closures of several coal-fired power stations collide with delays in building crucial new gas and clean energy projects to replace them.

In a new report to be released on Tuesday, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) warns “material changes” to its expectations of available power supplies over coming years in Victoria, South Australia, NSW and Queensland have reinforced the urgent need for new generation plants and other key infrastructure to be approved and rolled out.

East coast power shortages on the cards without new projects: AEMO

States on the eastern seaboard are at risk of power shortages from 2027 as the closures of coal-fired power plants collide with delays in building new projects.

www.smh.com.au

So I heard this on the radio, and I couldn't find anything other than this. In short, imo, it seems a 'catch up' is needed. The transition is not moving quick enough.

Also,

The calls for new gas-fired power generation to shore up the grid could add to the political challenge for Labor, which depends on support from the Greens to pass its new industrial emissions-reduction policy, known as the safeguard mechanism. The Greens have been pressuring Labor to commit to stopping new gas fields as a condition of their support.

Looks like we're approaching an impasse, who will fold the Greens or Labor?

Going by this article, which I'm not sure is 100% it seems we'll need dirty fuel to keep the lights on during transition.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Wonder if we’ll follow the European path and find ourselves resurrecting coal-fired power when the renewables fail to deliver. Conflict in the wider world, including China, won’t help.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Wonder if we’ll follow the European path and find ourselves resurrecting coal-fired power when the renewables fail to deliver. Conflict in the wider world, including China, won’t help.

Depends on the acceleration of technology to mitigate what >now< seems a problem, in 4 years time we may have further technological break throughs that will do that.

Seeing how the money seems to be following the renewable path, my money is on a concerted effort for those break throughs.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Depends on the acceleration of technology to mitigate what >now< seems a problem, in 4 years time we may have further technological break throughs that will do that.

Seeing how the money seems to be following the renewable path, my money is on a concerted effort for those break throughs.

Seems odd to me that you would close down your most reliable source of energy when the alternative is still unproven as to whether it can be equally effective.

 

[O Grobbecker]

Seems odd to me that you would close down your most reliable source of energy when the alternative is still unproven as to whether it can be equally effective.

Be careful who you vote for.

 

[Dogs_R_Us]

Seems odd to me that you would close down your most reliable source of energy when the alternative is still unproven as to whether it can be equally effective.

And the other alternative won’t be considered.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Seems odd to me that you would close down your most reliable source of energy when the alternative is still unproven as to whether it can be equally effective.

Willing to bet the alternative will be better than it is now when 2027 rolls around, reliable? We don't know, but it'll be improved on what it is now.

 

[Big Papa Ted]

Just build nuclear pants. This isn't a hard concept.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

Willing to bet the alternative will be better than it is now when 2027 rolls around, reliable? We don't know, but it'll be improved on what it is now.

Who cares if it's 'better' or 'improved' if it is still not equally reliable for what it is replacing.

Come 2027 we will be likely to be in an El Nino stage again. Remember the last El Nino period we had where we would have back to back 40+ degree days? Obviously not. Most people running their air conditioners all day putting significant strains on power supplies. Good luck to us if we have an inferior power supply... the elderly will be dropping like flies for starters.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

Seems odd to me that you would close down your most reliable source of energy when the alternative is still unproven as to whether it can be equally effective.

I see you have bought into the latest newscorp talking points.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

I see you have bought into the latest newscorp talking points.

No. I just made my own, what i believe is valid, talking point.

 

[Ghost Patrol]

No. I just made my own, what i believe is valid, talking point.

so it’s just a coincidence that it’s the same as todays article?

 

[Better Loosen Up]

so it’s just a coincidence that it’s the same as todays article?

Sorry to disappoint you but i haven't read any news today.

 

[adogsfan5]

Homes and businesses in every state on Australia’s eastern seaboard are at risk of electricity shortages from 2027 as looming closures of several coal-fired power stations collide with delays in building crucial new gas and clean energy projects to replace them.

In a new report to be released on Tuesday, the Australian Energy Market Operator (AEMO) warns “material changes” to its expectations of available power supplies over coming years in Victoria, South Australia, NSW and Queensland have reinforced the urgent need for new generation plants and other key infrastructure to be approved and rolled out.

East coast power shortages on the cards without new projects: AEMO

States on the eastern seaboard are at risk of power shortages from 2027 as the closures of coal-fired power plants collide with delays in building new projects.

www.smh.com.au

So I heard this on the radio, and I couldn't find anything other than this. In short, imo, it seems a 'catch up' is needed. The transition is not moving quick enough.

Also,

The calls for new gas-fired power generation to shore up the grid could add to the political challenge for Labor, which depends on support from the Greens to pass its new industrial emissions-reduction policy, known as the safeguard mechanism. The Greens have been pressuring Labor to commit to stopping new gas fields as a condition of their support.

Looks like we're approaching an impasse, who will fold the Greens or Labor?

Going by this article, which I'm not sure is 100% it seems we'll need dirty fuel to keep the lights on during transition.

Unacceptable. Find a short term solution as government.

 

[O Grobbecker]

Just build nuclear pants. This isn't a hard concept.

Close to impossible, now. It should have happened a decade ago. World Average time 9.4 years to build and massively expensive. It's foolish to ignore OEMC warnings.

 

[Carringbush2010]

Who cares if it's 'better' or 'improved' if it is still not equally reliable for what it is replacing.

Come 2027 we will be likely to be in an El Nino stage again. Remember the last El Nino period we had where we would have back to back 40+ degree days? Obviously not. Most people running their air conditioners all day putting significant strains on power supplies. Good luck to us if we have an inferior power supply... the elderly will be dropping like flies for starters.

It may be adequately reliable come that time, unlikely but we can't claim definitely it won't be.

But, if you are correct I guess we have 2 options

1. Do no change and continue with fossil fuels.
2. Accept the power black outs when they come.

Unless you have another solution.

 

[Better Loosen Up]

It may be adequately reliable come that time, unlikely but we can't claim definitely it won't be.

But, if you are correct I guess we have 2 options

1. Do no change and continue with fossil fuels.
2. Accept the power black outs when they come.

Unless you have another solution.

We continue with what we have now until the alternative can prove itself to be just as reliable and hopefully be of a cost benefit for the lower classes. Then we flick the switch and life continues on as normal.