Carbon emission control efforts put in perspective

[flyingcrocodile46]

Bad News for all those, would be, King Canute’s who seek to control Mother Nature.<o></o>:p
All of you out there across the globe who have fought so hard to tackle that hideous enemy of our planet, namely carbon emissions, you know....that god you worship of "Climate Change" or "Global Warming"? <o></o>

Well, it's necessary to inform you of some bad news. Very disappointing information. <o></o>
<o></o>
Are you sitting down? <o></o><o></o>
The current volcanic eruption going on in Iceland, since its first spewing of volcanic ash over past weeks, has NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you've made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet.<o></o><o></o>

I know, I know.... (group hug)...it's very disheartening to realize that all the carbon emission savings you accomplished while suffering the inconvenience and expense of: driving a Prius hybrid, buying fabric<o></o> grocery bags, sitting up till midnight to finish your kid's "The Green Revolution" science project, throwing out all of your non-green cleaning supplies, using only two squares of toilet paper, putting a brick in your toilet tank reservoir, selling your SUV and speedboat, going on vacation to the local beach instead of Kakadu, nearly getting hit every day on your bike, replacing your $1 light bulbs with $10 light bulbs ..well, in 4 weeks those savings have all gone down the tubes. <o></o><o></o>

The volcanic ash emitted into the Earth's atmosphere in the past 4 Weeks has totally erased every effort you've made in the past 5 years to reduce carbon. <o></o><o></o>

I wish I had a silver lining, but the bush fire season across the western US will start in about two months, fires that will negate efforts to reduce carbon in our world for the next two years. <o></o><o></o>

But hey, grab a beer, phone Nick Smith, and have a nice day! :apint:

[bogan]

yeh, but if efforts hadn't been made it'd now be twice as bad wouldn't it? :dodge: :shifty:

[flyingcrocodile46]

I hope that Iceland will be paying for all those carbon credits it has used up :yes:

[avgas]

I hope that Iceland will be paying for all those carbon credits it has used up :yes:
Of course they won't its an act of god. Just like the war in Iraq :P

[flyingcrocodile46]

Of course they won't its an act of god. Just like the war in Iraq :P

Speaking of piss poor actors, where are the Thunderbirds?

[slofox]

...selling your SUV...

That, in itself, is well worth the effort...the less tanks on the road the better I like it...

[avgas]

Speaking of piss poor actors, where are the Thunderbirds?
Ford stop making them ages ago man.

[rainman]

The current volcanic eruption going on in Iceland, since its first spewing of volcanic ash over past weeks, has NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you've made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet.

"Iceland's Eyjafjoell volcano is emitting between 150,000 and 300,000 tonnes of CO2 per day, a figure placing it in the same emissions league as a small-to-medium European economy, experts said on Monday.
...
Experts stressed that the volcano contributed just a tiny amount -- less than a third of one percentage point -- of global emissions of greenhouse gases"

But never let the facts get in the way of a good ideological rant, eh?

[JimO]

"Iceland's Eyjafjoell volcano is emitting between 150,000 and 300,000 tonnes of CO2 per day, a figure placing it in the same emissions league as a small-to-medium European economy, experts said on Monday.
...
Experts stressed that the volcano contributed just a tiny amount -- less than a third of one percentage point -- of global emissions of greenhouse gases"

But never let the facts get in the way of a good ideological rant, eh?

how much does NZ emit

[schrodingers cat]

how much does NZ emit

Tons! All that methane from the Dairy Industry. If it wasn't the only thing keeping our economy running there would be more fuss about it.

[Jantar]

how much does NZ emit
According to the World Bank developement indicators NewZealand emits around 28,000,000 tnnes per annum. That is 76000 tonnes per day.

[flyingcrocodile46]

since its first spewing of volcanic ash over past weeks, has NEGATED EVERY SINGLE EFFORT you've made in the past five years to control CO2 emissions on our planet.<o></o><o></o>

"Iceland's Eyjafjoell volcano is emitting between 150,000 and 300,000 tonnes of CO2 per day, a figure placing it in the same emissions league as a small-to-medium European economy, experts said on Monday.
...
Experts stressed that the volcano contributed just a tiny amount -- less than a third of one percentage point -- of global emissions of greenhouse gases"
But never let the facts get in the way of a good ideological rant, eh? Hell no!... they seem to support it.

According to the World Bank developement indicators NewZealand emits around 28,000,000 tnnes per annum. That is 76000 tonnes per day.
225,000 tonnes per day times 28 days = 6,300,000 tonnes of Co2 in the 4 weeks of volcano eruptions. (about 25% of NZ's annual output) "just a tiny amount -- less than a third of one percentage point" but still more than 5 years worth of the worlds combined reduction in C02 emissions.

I think the thread title is very appropriate and as for ideological rants!... the supposed fact based data added thus far kind of erodes your ideology theory somewhat eh:laugh:

[bogan]

225,000 tonnes per day times 28 days = 6,300,000 tonnes of Co2 in the 4 weeks of volcano eruptions. (about 25% of NZ's annual output) "just a tiny amount -- less than a third of one percentage point" but still more than 5 years worth of the worlds combined reduction in C02 emissions.

how'd you manage to measure 5 years worth of C02 emission reductions?

[rainman]

225,000 tonnes per day times 28 days = 6,300,000 tonnes of Co2 in the 4 weeks of volcano eruptions. (about 25% of NZ's annual output) "just a tiny amount -- less than a third of one percentage point" but still more than 5 years worth of the worlds combined reduction in C02 emissions.

Ah, now I get what you're on about. So you are rejoicing in the fact that carbon emission reductions have been (relatively) ineffective, and our lack of resilience has been complicated as a result of an exceptional emission event?

Are you mad?


how'd you manage to measure 5 years worth of C02 emission reductions?

Good question. Surely he wouldn't use a model - they are those bad things scientists use to show we're in the shit, aren't they?

[JimO]

According to the World Bank developement indicators NewZealand emits around 28,000,000 tnnes per annum. That is 76000 tonnes per day.

thats a lot, if its true

[cowpoos]

But never let the facts get in the way of a good ideological rant, eh?

Thats pretty dam hypocritical coming from someone who believes in man made global warming...lol!!!

I suppose you will plead ignorant of the IPCC email saga??

[Scuba_Steve]

But never let the facts get in the way of a good ideological rant, eh?

Dont worry Climagate never have

[flyingcrocodile46]

Ah, now I get what you're on about. So you are rejoicing in the fact that carbon emission reductions have been (relatively) ineffective
Not rejoicing so much as rolling my eyes out loud at the realisation of how minuscule our questionable efforts are.


Are you mad?

Unquestionably

[rainman]

Not rejoicing so much as rolling my eyes out loud at the realisation of how minuscule our questionable efforts are.

So we should do more?

OK.

[JimO]

what difference will it make

[bogan]

Good question. Surely he wouldn't use a model - they are those bad things scientists use to show we're in the shit, aren't they?

I don't care what he used, I'm just after the info to judge for myself whats going on.

[flyingcrocodile46]

So we should do more?

OK.

Yes in a perfect world, and No in the real world.

I don't want to make sacrifices if the results aren't going to make a significant and immediate impact. I'd sooner make a sacrifice to fund research into advancing the ultimate solution of addressing imbalances by way of clean technology and cleaning technology. (think International Rescue... LMAO)

[flyingcrocodile46]

what difference will it make

That's also (sort of) my point


I don't care what he used, I'm just after the info to judge for myself whats going on.

Nag, nag, nag.

I made it up :bleh:

Nah! I can't take credit for it.
Someone else made it all up :laugh:

[bogan]

Nag, nag, nag.

I made it up :bleh:

Nah! I can't take credit for it.
Someone else made it all up :laugh:

so its all made up, and we just get to believe whatever we want cos there are no reliable facts out there? that about sums up your argument?

[flyingcrocodile46]

so its all made up, and we just get to believe whatever we want cos there are no reliable facts out there? that about sums up your argument?

It's not an argument. It's a theory (Ideology is fact-less). Some facts were added by Jantar and that autistic fella (you can trust facts from savants, they is clever peeps)

[Jantar]

what difference will it make
Around 0.0006 C by the end of the cetury.

[Jantar]

...Some facts were added by Jantar ....
I would like to claim credit for adding some facts, but even that data I gave is only an estimate. There is no reliable way of measuring emmissions, only concentrations. An estimate of emmission sources can be made by comparing atmospheric isotopes, but it is still only an estimate.

The amount of forcing (ie change of temperature for changes in concentration) can be calculated exactly as it's a logarithmic ratio, and that calculation shows that there will be very little temperature change for any further change in CO2. Where the current research is aimed at isn't the direct correllation but at the feedbacks. Again there is a lot of argument about the effect of these feedbacks. All we know for certain is that we don't know anything for ceratin.

[flyingcrocodile46]

I would like to claim credit for adding some facts, but even that data I gave is only an estimate. There is no reliable way of measuring emmissions, only concentrations. An estimate of emmission sources can be made by comparing atmospheric isotopes, but it is still only an estimate.

The amount of forcing (ie change of temperature for changes in concentration) can be calculated exactly as it's a logarithmic ratio, and that calculation shows that there will be very little temperature change for any further change in CO2. Where the current research is aimed at isn't the direct correllation but at the feedbacks. Again there is a lot of argument about the effect of these feedbacks. All we know for certain is that we don't know anything for ceratin.


Lol. No point in asking if you can accurately estimate the ratios required to calculate the equivalent ecological damage resulting from the BP oil leak as compared to the volcano then is there.

[mashman]

quick... to the batmobile, i've got a hand full of small trees in the garden, we could tidy up this mess in about 20 minutes :)

[flyingcrocodile46]

quick... to the batmobile, i've got a hand full of small trees in the garden, we could tidy up this mess in about 20 minutes :)

Lol. Doctor Manhattan wouldn't take that long

[JimO]

. All we know for certain is that we don't know anything for ceratin.

apert from the fact it will cost us a fortune

[davereid]

So we should do more? OK.

The puny $3 a week that the carbon tax has put on our energy usage won't change a thing. Its no where near enough to seriously change our energy usage. Even pensioners and the poor will be able to cook food, afford bus fare or a car and keep warm with a charge like that.

If we really want to make a difference we have to make it a proper charge.

Like $300 a week. Then you would see a reduction in carbon usage ! The poor would walk, and keep warm with a blanket. Pensioners could boil the jug once a day and keep the water hot in a thermos.

And there would be no congestion on the roads, and I could park anywhere I wanted.

[peasea]

Ford stop making them ages ago man.

2005 wasn't that long ago.

[rainman]

If we really want to make a difference we have to make it a proper charge.

I agree entirely, but I suspect the howls of outrage would be deafening. It'd also be political suicide for any politician who suggested such a thing, so it ain't gonna happen. So it looks like all of those who don't like science, and insist there is no anthropogenic climate change happening will get their theory tested. Unfortunately for all of us, and for all the other species who will be affected, we'll all be well fucked when they are proven wrong.

And I'll bet there will be no accountability for those who prevented us from addressing this while we still might be able to, when reality gets to be too hard to ignore, no matter how hard they try.

[flyingcrocodile46]

And I'll bet there will be no accountability for those who prevented us from addressing this while we still might be able to

Who's stopping you. If you want to save the world there is no point wasting time crying about it in the expectation that you can bend others to your will, get on with it yourself. Make a statement of substance by selling your cars and motorcycles, grow your own food and make your own clothes out of the compost or STFU.

[paulmac]

Thing of the savings if all motorsport was banned !!!!!

[rainman]

Who's stopping you.

No-one. I'm certainly not zero carbon but working towards reduction, in the context of the other issues that are around. I do grow a lot of my own food (organically, what's more), compost extensively, repair rather than replace, and generally live a minimal consumer life. My bike is probably the least green thing I have (apart from the kids :) ), and it does use less fossil energy than an SUV (although it's old,so probably a bit dirty emissions-wise). Anyway, with the way this recession is going I can't afford to WOF, register and ride it at the moment, so the impact is somewhat reduced.

[firefighter]

We should do more, but it's folly even trying until China, India and the U.S make some massive changes.

It's not even like pissing into the wind, it's like pissing into the hurricane of hurricanes.

Take a look at the consumption and pollution in those countries alone, and you will very quickly realise that N.Z may as well not even bother unless they do something quick-smart, and it's not going to happen, so just enjoy yourself. I do'nt care what the apparently "objective" stats say, they're dodgy as fuck. Seeing is believing, and there is nothing is to be achieved when there is such savage destruction going on abroad.

For the record, I do recycle and refuse to litter, but that's about as far as I go with that.

Oh, and on the SUV thing, they're actually pretty damn good. I'm surprised that my 1994 diesel Terrano uses about the same amount of fuel as the the ex's 2002 1.5 Honda Civic, so less than most 2L cars would use.

[cowpoos]

So it looks like all of those who don't like science, and insist there is no anthropogenic climate change happening will get their theory tested. Unfortunately for all of us, and for all the other species who will be affected, we'll all be well fucked when they are proven wrong.

Thats simply not true rainman!! we won't be fucked....there is a precedent for warmer temperatures already in human history...as there is for colder temperatures. we have experienced Ice ages and the medieval warm period as a species. We have survived fine. after all these natural occurrences are part of the earths natural cycles. Average 6-7 degrees warmer during the medieval warm period wasn't caused by humans was it?
We need to take a common sense approach to this farcical ideology of ACC or AGW or what ever the green movement are calling it. The scaremongering simply has to stop!!
Fortunately most people arn't stupid...and the majority see this concept as a load of rot!!
What the green movement should be focusing on is the real pollutants that effect our enviroment...Toxic chemicals, dangerous pure heavy metals and the like.
The green movement is so hung up of hydrocarbon equivalents, of CO2.





I do grow a lot of my own food (organically, what's more), compost extensively, repair rather than replace, and generally live a minimal consumer life. .

Organics is an interesting subject...and an individual choice...Just out of interest...why do you believe its better?

[rainman]

Take a look at the consumption and pollution in those countries alone, and you will very quickly realise that N.Z may as well not even bother unless they do something quick-smart, and it's not going to happen, so just enjoy yourself.

Not a position I can fit into my ethics, but whatever.


Organics is an interesting subject...and an individual choice...Just out of interest...why do you believe its better?

Lotsa reasons:
- Cheaper than supermarket food if done right (and if I value my labour as free)
- I like to garden, so it isn't really work
- Need to be mindful of pests and diseases, and weather - it's not just spray and ignore
- I'm building good soil, and getting good results
- I can grow things that the supermarket system doesn't deliver (unusual varieties)
- I don't have to gamble with complicated chemicals and possible nasty side-effects
- Food miles reduced to food metres
- Education, because I think it's important we know how to grow. We have lost a lot of skill in this area.
- Like it or not commercial food production is highly dependent on oil, and like it or not oil is going to get more expensive.
- No GE required
- Good mechanism for dealing with depression (seriously, there is good research on this)
- Involves the community, I get to meet new people from gardening, and I have a bunch of gardening friends
- I can save my own seeds and select those plants that I want to develop (lots to learn in plant genetics though)
- I can trade plants, seeds etc with others - collecting stuff, basically
- Source of a small amount of income (probably offset by costs, at the moment, but break even is still good)
- It's a thing I can do for the community - busy growing a bunch of onions for a community garden as we speak, teaching the kids at the local school, working with elderly, etc
- I can grow relatively weird things and then learn to cook them
- I can learn which herbs are useful and make my own medicines (for a limited range of things, but still)
- I can make herbal teas from fresh ingredients
- I can preserve excess produce, sell it, or give it away
- I can brew excess fruit into wines, at least some of which are drinkable. I can't sell these, though.
- Gets me outside into the sun/rain
- Projects. I extended by raised beds and built a greenhouse, added a water tank for storage, built compost bins, looking at automation/heat control for greenhouse, looking at keeping chickens...
- It's something I can do with the kids
...

Need any more?

[Jantar]

.... So it looks like all of those who don't like science, and insist there is no anthropogenic climate change happening will get their theory tested. Unfortunately for all of us, and for all the other species who will be affected, we'll all be well fucked when they are proven wrong....... And for all those who do like science, and insist there is no anthropogenic climate change happening? Well they are the true scientists. Scientific method demands that scientists who put forward any theory should also put forward a null hypothesis to test their theory against. In the case of AGW, that hasn't been done.

On thursday next week there is a Global Warming forum here in Alexandra. Our company has been asked to help lead the forum, and as a result I have been looking at the effects of Global warming on New Zealand. This isn't dealing with the question of is it or isn't it happening, but rather assuming it is appening what will be the effect on our area.

The results of a 2 degree warming will mean slightly more rainfall which is great for a semi arid region. Better river flows with more winter flow and less chance of major floods in spring (due to a higher snow line). Better plant growth with less severe frost and the ability to grow types of vegetation not seen in Central Otago since the MWP. Fewer deaths in winter due to a less severe climate. More predictable wind patterns etc.

Overall we can find only positive outcomes for this part of New Zealand.

[Scuba_Steve]

Well I just have to ask, whens "Global Warming" gonna start? I would like to ride in winter without my fingertips freezing.

[Blackflagged]

Were does the money go from ETS tax? Anyone got a good link, explaining how the carbon credit trading works.In simple or should i say, simpleton language.:wacko:

[peasea]

Thing of the savings if all motorsport was banned !!!!!

I think you'll find that rugby chews more energy than motorsport. It certainly creates a lot of hot air.

[peasea]

Were does the money go from ETS tax? Anyone got a good link, explaining how the carbon credit trading works.In simple or should i say, simpleton language.:wacko:

Email Nick Smith and ask him.
mailto:nick4nelson@parliament.govt.nz

He states " If you need my assistance either contact me at my office or my caravan at the Nelson market.
I hold three Ministerial roles in the National Government: Minister for the Environment, Climate Change Issues and ACC."

Go hard.

[peasea]

Well I just have to ask, whens "Global Warming" gonna start? I would like to ride in winter without my fingertips freezing.

Haha, so true. I can see snow from my window!

[Scuba_Steve]

Were does the money go from ETS tax? Anyone got a good link, explaining how the carbon credit trading works.In simple or should i say, simpleton language.:wacko:

I dont know of a link but I did find a pic showing exactly where it goes in "simpleton language"
http://thebsreport.files.wordpress.com/2009/06/money_down_toilet-2.jpg

[avgas]

Were does the money go from ETS tax? Anyone got a good link, explaining how the carbon credit trading works.In simple or should i say, simpleton language.:wacko:
I looked into it about 3 months ago, as I actually thought it was a good idea. What I saw changed my mind about.
Long story short - my initial findings found this.
1) If you Emmit you pay for the emissions to a govt agency
2) This govt agency trades with others on an international level (think stock market)
3) On this market people trade for a fictitious thing that govt are given according to emissions.

I put a letter of complaint in, stating this was not ETS but simply a trading scheme similar to that of Ponzi nature. Since then they have done many revamps - its not there yet, but its better. And if organized the money 'could' stay in NZ.

Updated site is here http://www.climatechange.govt.nz/emissions-trading-scheme/index.html

Basically points 1 and 2 are the same, but then
3) Credits are sold to the market from traders who have measured units (e.g. forrestry)
4) Trading conducted on local and international markets.

[JimO]

No-one. I'm certainly not zero carbon but working towards reduction, in the context of the other issues that are around. I do grow a lot of my own food (organically, what's more), compost extensively, repair rather than replace, and generally live a minimal consumer life. My bike is probably the least green thing I have (apart from the kids :) ), and it does use less fossil energy than an SUV (although it's old,so probably a bit dirty emissions-wise). Anyway, with the way this recession is going I can't afford to WOF, register and ride it at the moment, so the impact is somewhat reduced.

im doing my bit i have 6 cars one a dirty old V8 and 2 motorbikes and a boat i might just go out and run the coon for a while, the planet could do with warming up