Forums

Climate: The Best Case Scenario

Climate: The Best Case Scenario

"It is 2050. We have been successful at halving emissions every decade since 2020. We are heading for a world that will be no more than 1.5C warmer by 2100

In most places in the world, the air is moist and fresh, even in cities. It feels a lot like walking through a forest and very likely this is exactly what you are doing. The air is cleaner than it has been since before the Industrial Revolution. We have trees to thank for that. They are everywhere."

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/feb/15/best-case-scenario-2...

jimglas | 01. maaliskuu 2020

never happen
too much money to be made
and politicians to be bought

teslu3 | 01. maaliskuu 2020

"We have trees to thank for that." Not if we are still spewing fossil fuel residue into the atmosphere. No amount of carbon capture will prevent noxious VOCs, NOx and particulate matter in the air.

FISHEV | 01. maaliskuu 2020

"never happen...too much money to be made...and politicians to be bought"

You probably won't to read the "Worst Case Scenario" by another climate scientist.

EU and China have the basics of the policy in place so only US is laggard along with some other 2nd world countries.

NKYTA | 01. maaliskuu 2020

Flag and move on.

SCCRENDO | 01. maaliskuu 2020

No don’t flag. He asks a serious question. I would say don’t be such a cynic. This is serious stuff and needs to be addressed. And if further steps are needed in 2050 we need to do what it takes. The problem is that you suggest that this involves pain. The transition from stinky fossil fuels is not that painful. Do you think it stucks to be forced to drive a Tesla?? And indeed we could all benefit from a green new deal.

SCCRENDO | 01. maaliskuu 2020

In fact he is correct. We have a moron captain navigating our ship. The EU and China are way ahead of us. Trump and his MAGA hatters have moved us back to the dark ages

MitchP85D | 01. maaliskuu 2020

The US leads the world in reducing carbon emissions in 2019 on a country basis. We are on par with the EU. China and India have increased their CO2 emissions.

https://www.iea.org/articles/global-co2-emissions-in-2019

To call the US "laggards" is flat-out wrong!

derotam | 02. maaliskuu 2020

Yeah China is way ahead of the U.S.....in increasing CO2 emissions.

China from 1990 to 2005 161% increase, 2005 to 2017 74% increase
U.S. from 1990 to 2005 17% increase, 2005 to 2017 14% DECREASE

andy.connor.e | 02. maaliskuu 2020

Dont encourage fishev

Orthopod | 02. maaliskuu 2020

How could this scenario prevent happen in a capitalist system with infinite growth?

FISHEV | 03. maaliskuu 2020

"The US leads the world in reducing carbon emissions in 2019 on a country basis."

China per capita GHG emissions. 9 tons.
US per capita GHG emissions. 20 tons.

China leads on solar power, fast electric trains, EV car production. In every area of green tech China leads the world. Kind of good thing that most populous nation on earth has the greenest plans. Shame US is no longer world leader.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Ohh come on now FISHY, if you are going to go with per capita, then stick with that metric!

China installed PV 123Wh per capita
US installed PV 191Wh per capita

China EV's in 2018 was 1 for every 1200 people
US EV's in 2018 was 1 for every 818 people.

If you want to use a metric, then stick with that metric! and plans mean nothing if they aren't implemented.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

From 2005 to 2017 China INCREASED fossil CO2 emissions by 3.23grams per capita

From 2005 to 2017 the U.S. REDUCED fossil CO2 emissions by 2.64grams per capita.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

This is an apples to oranges comparison. The United States is already an established 1st world country. China is trying to become an established 1st world company. Industrialization in a hurry is a dirtier process. The US should be the adult in the room and do better. The point that @FISHEV makes and I agree with is that China has taken more advantage of the green revolution with development of solar panels, electric trains EV car production etc. We are importing solar panels from China. Why are we not producing the solar panels and selling them to China. Our leaders are incentivizing dirty jobs rather than being smart and initiating a green new deal. Was pulling out of the Paris accords a smart move. Anyone who doesn’t walk around with a MAGA hat would think not.

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Probably because China doesnt have an oil lobby.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

@SCCRENDO: I agree with you, and yet people still try and toss those comparisons around. If someone wants to point to a comparison that individually makes the U.S. look worse with no other context, I will fight back.

Statements like FISHEV on the per capita GHG are exactly the wrong way to make the we have to change case because it is just as easy to change things on the face and make the U.S. not look like the bad guy.

Your statement of why don't we produce solar panels and sell them to China? That is just a flawed statement all around. If we produced the solar panels they would be horribly expensive and China would have absolutely no reason to pay for them when they can make them so much cheaper(even though dirtier). The only reason for them to buy from us would be to have "cleaner" produced panels. If China is so advanced, then why don't they advance their power generation away from Coal? Since 2016 China has been INCREASING coal production.

I do agree that we should be limiting our imports from China, but that would help the China emission issue by brute force, not by China doing it themselves.

FISHEV | 03. maaliskuu 2020

"If you want to use a metric, then stick with that metric!"

I did.

China per capita GHG emissions. 9 tons.
US per capita GHG emissions. 20 tons.

Says it all. When US gets to China's per capita emissions, US can talk, first has to do the walk.

On EV's China leads the world on EV production, EV battery production and has regs to back it up.

"When it comes to electric vehicles, no nation has matched China's audacious plan. It wants to beat the world.

"China's emerging leadership has been the subject of recent studies. One of them, released earlier this year by McKinsey & Co., the global consulting firm, revealed how China has normalized the use of electric cars while it remains a curiosity in much of the world. McKinsey's research included a poll that found between 10% and 30% of Americans say their next car will be electric. Europe's share of "leaners" toward EVs ranged from 40% to 60%.

Then there was China, where 70% of respondents expected to be driving an EV sometime soon."

US is going backwards, cutting emissions standards, there's just no comparison.

FISHEV | 03. maaliskuu 2020

"Last year, Chinese automakers sold 1.25 million EVs. That's a 62% increase over the previous year. Moreover, there were 808,000 EV chargers in China, including 330,000 public charging stations. That compares to about a half-million in the United States, where roughly 80% are in private homes.

China has taken the financial and political lead in promoting EVs to help reduce greenhouse gas emissions, to combat major problems with air pollution in its cities and to reduce the nation's dependence on imported oil. China is not likely to relinquish its lead anytime soon, said David Sandalow, an author of the Columbia study.

"Given the scale of China's investment in this sector, the potential for dramatic innovations that would make a difference in world markets is very, very high,"

https://www.eenews.net/stories/1061481329

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

If China can build their own coal plants or their own solar panels, why would they pay tariffs for another countrys products?

That literally makes zero sense.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Ok well if you want to make per capita the metric to determine who should be stepping up, then we should be going after Palau, Curaco, Qatar, Trinadad and Tobago, Bahrain, Kuwait, and the 9 other countries that have higher per capita Fossil CO2 emissions than the U.S.

Go ahead, make the next inevitable argument...

jimglas | 03. maaliskuu 2020

its winter in Colorado and I am selling electricity to our local grid.
It can be done now. Too bad our government is owned by the fossil fuel lobby.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Yep, and too bad the power companies don't really want to lose customers to residential solar.

jimglas | 03. maaliskuu 2020

the company here actuallly ives a rebate to those who install home solar. They have been mandated to have some percentage of renewables by 2030, its cheaper for them to have individuals provide the capital outlay

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Yeah, where I am the power companies have a maximum amount of net metering that can be with them. It's all based on negotiation with the state, so they fight to keep it as low as they can. Sure not consumer friendly, but that is Virginia.

jimglas | 03. maaliskuu 2020

my max was 120% of the previous years use
thats what I did.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Dominion power in Virginia has a cap on net metering of "1% of utility's adjusted Virginia peak-load forecast for the previous year" and residential arrays are limited to 20kW, but you can't net meter more than your annual usage without a power purchase agreement which has it's own limitations.

jimglas | 03. maaliskuu 2020

all of these limitations are due to the fact that the fossil fuel lobby owns our government.
Renwables should be subsidized, not fossil fuels.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

You guys miss the whole point when it comes to green industries. China's government is committed to cleaning up the environment. You don't need to even talk to scientists when you see the pollution over Beijing. The advantage that a dictatorship like China has is that they can mandate what the population does. Their problem is that the mandates are not always carried out by local officials. We need to create the appropriate financial incentivizes. This is an American technology the Chinese took over. It is one of the weaknesses of Democracy.

As Thomas Friedman sated in his book "hot, flat and crowded" we need to become China for a day to get the mandates passed. But we would carry through mandates more efficiently. SO we only need to become China for a day
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/china-leader-solar-power-18082...

FISHEV | 03. maaliskuu 2020

" The advantage that a dictatorship like China has is that they can mandate what the population does."

What's crazy is the dictatorship is based on climate science and US semi-democracy on crazy right wing conspiracy theories. The US president quotes long debunked right wing conspiracy theories on everything from climate to EV's and Congress supports him and passes polices that push the US further and further behind.

EU is democratic though and they are much more like China in policies so you can't credit dictatorship as only solution.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Our democracy moves slower than Europe. As Bernie states. Our economy is run by billionaires and their lobbyists whose financial interests differ from what is best for the country. And indeed our Presidents and Senators are elected by a system that gives MAGA hatters a more powerful vote with smaller states and rural areas having relatively more clout per vote

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

@SCCRENDO: "China's government is committed to cleaning up the environment."

Care to expound on what exactly they have "committed" to doing? And please be specific. :)

MitchP85D | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Yet, the bottom line is that the United States led all nations by reducing carbon emissions by 140 Megatons in 2019. And this was done by consumer free-market choice of power generation. The United States is showing the rest of the world how to so this without mandating what type of power generation the consumer must by. I am amused how this fact irritates the authoritarian-socialist mindset.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

@MitchP95D, but you forget, unless the U.S. goes "all-out" it will never be good enough, but China's "commitments" are seen as the gold standard and they might as well be guaranteed to meet and beat them! Yes I am being a bit over dramatic, but it does feel like the U.S. can do no right and China can do no wrong with some of the statements that get thrown around.

It's kinda like comparing apples to oranges....
but China is a 3rd world country and the U.S is a 1st world country....
but but per capita per capita...unless it makes China look bad then go back to "its a 3rd world country"...
but but China is a dictatorship so they can just make things happen, we wish the U.S. was more like that

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020
derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Cause that is where I go for climate change info...Time magazine.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Btw. You guys are using the usual MAGA hatter slur point to discredit anything that China has done well. Just like Bernie's point about Cuba doing a good thing for Cuban education does not mean he is praising Cuba and Castro. He is quick to point out that Castro was an evil dicataor. And Bernie is not the one who is licking Putin's butt, befriending the Turkish, Saudi Arabian and Filipino diactators as well as praising and boasting about his friendship with rocketman KIm. ANd yes China has it;'s issues and it's political system sucks. But the government is trying harder than our MAGA hatters back home. I guess my point about wanting to be China for just one day went way above your MAGA hats.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

@Derotam. If you learnt to read you would see that Time magazine does in depth investiagtions into the strategies of countries and would be a better source than a scientific journal. And just to piss you off further here is a wikipedia link.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Climate_change_in_China

You continue to fail to debate the science yet come up with dumb critiques of the sources I provide. If you don't like my sources try come up with some of your own to try refute my points and /or support your points.

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Stop looking for the government to make the change happen, and do it yourself. Be the change.

Government does not know how to solve problems. They only know how to waste money.

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Can you please quote the specific passage on that Time article that talks about the specific commitments China has made?

It's funny that you think you are pissing me off, annoyed at reading articles that don't say what you think they say, yes, pissed off, no. keep it going, lets go! :)

derotam | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Ooooooo, wikipedia article, that again doesn't say what you think it says...again, please quote the specific commitments.

Keep googling, you'll come up with something eventually, but only if you actually READ what you find first to make sure it says what you want it to say.

By the way, I got tired of posting links to things you clearly won't read since you have refused to read my links in the past. The info it out there, I've found it, can you!

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

@andy. It is not a level playing field. It favors fossil fuels. The government has to tilt the playing field in the right direction, away from fossil fuels and towards clean energies. That is what good governments do. It's like the coronavirus. A good administration would take take the politics out of it and take the appropriate moves to decrease the impact of an inevitable pandemic

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Of course they're going to tilt it. That doesnt mean you cant do it. Make the choice to ride your bike instead. Walk. Get solar, get rid of natural gas appliances. Reduce water consumption. Anyone can do it.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

@andy That is a very simplistic view, If fossils fuel industries are subsidized and pay no penalty to harm the environment whereas alternate energies get no incentives and are more expensive to start this is not a level playing field. Governments need to remove fossil fuel subsidies, penalize pollution with cap and trade and carbon credits while at the same time incentivizing clean energies. This will tilt the playing field towards cleaner fuels and stimulate innovation

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Im all for removing subsidies. But if you, yourself, reduce your demand for oil, the company will lose. Its not any different from any other company. If you dont like it, figure out a way to live without it. Oil companies are only drilling because there is a demand for it.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Individuals need to do the right thing. And there is power in multiple individuals. But most are apathetic and/or ignorant. And this is mandatory not voluntary. So the government needs to step in with carrots and sticks

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

I say start with giving people the math. When they realize that there is no argument about the cost savings on EVs and solar, you've just made more progress than government. Imagine if 1000 people did that.

SCCRENDO | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Yes indeed. But the bottom line is that insufficient people have been doing it. It's like the coronvirus. If isolation is necessary we don't make it voluntary. We mandate it

andy.connor.e | 03. maaliskuu 2020

Do your part to accelerate it. Waiting for government will be too late. Knowledge is power.

FISHEV | 03. maaliskuu 2020

"Care to expound on what exactly they have "committed" to doing?"

1. Leads world in EV production.
2. Leads world in solar production and installation.
3. Leads the world high speed rail system vs. fossil fueled transport.
4. Leads the world in wind power production and installation.

Those are the hallmarks of a sustainable future.

FISHEV | 03. maaliskuu 2020

"Do your part to accelerate it. Waiting for government will be too late. Knowledge is power."@andy.connor.e

Advice you might want to follow and buy an EV vs. harassing Tesla owners.

Pages