The Climate Change Discussion Thread

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Wigs

Why, is someone on this forum PR for David Suzuki?

Someone can both agree with the overall viewpoint of someone without agreeing with absolutely every statement that comes out of their mouths.

There's also an increasing challenge with old school environmentalists who are essentially ecosocialists. As the energy transition goes mainstream and capitalism takes root in cleantech, they are resorting to more extreme rhetoric to stay in the news.

A decade ago, saying something like, "All cars should be electric and gas cars should be banned," would have you labelled as some crazy environazi. Today, governments and industry itself, are essentially driving to this very goal with technology and policy. So what's an environazi to actually do?

[Acajack]

Glad to see there are some people capable of having a rational discussion.

I was wondering about my reaction that this was a needlessly inflammatory take from someone who may have been on the inside for too long.

Or if he's actually right to raise the alarm in this way, and that the end justifies the means.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by rofina

Dumb.

Pipeline down for 5 days in Van and were rationing gas, mass gas thefts, statins out of fuel.

Imagine no pipeline for a month or two. We cant handle it.

Stations have more fuel, any panic buy can clear out inventory (gas, bread, eggs). The truth is in the ability to restock, which so far hasn't been a problem for gas. The others I'm not so sure of.

Suzuki is probably talking about new pipelines (TMX, Coastal Gas) more so than the existing lines.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Glad to see there are some people capable of having a rational discussion.

I was wondering about my reaction that this was a needlessly inflammatory take from someone who may have been on the inside for too long.

Or if he's actually right to raise the alarm in this way, and that the end justifies the means.

Suzuki has been off the deep end for a while. He's well known as an asshole. Still drives a Prius.

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

The forgotten oil ads that told us climate change was nothing

It's not like they've even stopped. See the War Room and the bullcrap they put out. The most insidious shit, isn't outright denial anymore. It's pushing for inaction or pushing hopelessness.

That said, sometimes you just have to laugh at the hypocrisy and desperation. For example, on one hand, we get all kinds of propaganda about how ethical Canadian oil is, and that's why it should get special treatment. On the other hand, the oil patch has zero issues taking capital from the supposedly unethical Saudis or Chinese sovereign wealth funds or SOEs.

The new one, south of the border, is the big push to preserve natural gas for cooking, in the face of a growing number of state and municipal governments mandating all electric new homes, as the growing body of evidence shows health, climate and economic benefits of doing so. They aren't even above targeting kids. Cooking generates very little revenue for gas companies. But they are really afraid of people who rip out or avoid gas stoves, also targeting the real money makers: gas furnaces and water heaters.

• Video Link

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by Acajack

Glad to see there are some people capable of having a rational discussion.

I was wondering about my reaction that this was a needlessly inflammatory take from someone who may have been on the inside for too long.

Or if he's actually right to raise the alarm in this way, and that the end justifies the means.

The Economist had a great piece in their 1843 magazine recently on two environmentalists who sabotaged a pipeline and were convicted of terrorism offences:

https://www.economist.com/1843/2021/...line-saboteurs

Apparently the sentences given to these individuals, while there has been no consequences for oil & gas execs who lied and misled the public, has sort of gotten a lot of environmentalists upset. I think this could be just some of the context of the comments.

That said, Suzuki's threat by insinuation is pretty disgusting.

[WarrenC12]

Gotta say, I love my gas stovetop. It's actually the only "gas" I use directly myself. I even have an electric BBQ.

[sleepyeyed]

it's always interesting to me that people are willing to vent natural gas into their house through a stove...

[Hackslack]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

Forum Search: Pipelines

(?)

I’m having a hard time understanding the intent of your reply… care to elaborate?

[Truenorth00]

Originally Posted by WarrenC12

Gotta say, I love my gas stovetop. It's actually the only "gas" I use directly myself. I even have an electric BBQ.

There's a reason professional chefs are increasingly moving to induction. You only need the flame for certain applications which can always be substituted with a kitchen torch where necessary. Unless you cook with a wok and have a jet burner at home, induction is almost always the better solution. Save gas for the outdoor grilling.... Though I'd argue there's no substitute for good charcoal.

Originally Posted by sleepyeyed

it's always interesting to me that people are willing to vent natural gas into their house through a stove...

Yep. Aside from the obvious risk of poisoning. The link to asthma in kids should have it banned from homes.



https://www.sciencetimes.com/amp/art...isk-asthma.htm


https://www.nationalasthma.org.au/li...ma-in-children

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

There's also an increasing challenge with old school environmentalists who are essentially ecosocialists.

I wouldn't say eco-socialists as I would increasingly call them eco-terrorists.

As he states that pipelines would be blown up with a gleam in his eye, he is effectively stating that he has no problem with violence to advance his political agenda. That, in any other situation, would be called terrorism and hate-speech. Wouldn't it be interesting if some extreme environmentalists thought we should return to off-grid housing and hence decided to blow up his 4 BC homes.........he would be on the CBC crying crocodile tears in 5 minutes.

Suzuki and friends have done immeasurable damage to the environmental movement and environment itself. From their radical anti-nuclear power propaganda of the 1970s/80s which led to massive coal-fired plant expansion, to refusing to even consider using fossil fuels for energy even if completely zero emissions, and to their now tepid acceptance of violence creating a media field day for companies wanting to roll back environmental legislation............the man is a one-way environmental disaster.

[someone123]

Originally Posted by ssiguy

Suzuki and friends have done immeasurable damage to the environmental movement and environment itself. From their radical anti-nuclear power propaganda of the 1970s/80s which led to massive coal-fired plant expansion, to refusing to even consider using fossil fuels for energy even if completely zero emissions, and to their now tepid acceptance of violence creating a media field day for companies wanting to roll back environmental legislation............the man is a one-way environmental disaster.

If you objectively look back at what he has promoted, it doesn't look so great today. Not in terms of economy vs. environment or something like that but in terms of his own goals.

In addition to anti-nuclear he is or was anti-GMO and anti-immigration. Not sure if he has ever admitted to being wrong on any major issues.

People will say that nobody has a crystal ball, and I agree, but he tends to present ideas as though they are settled and everybody else needs to get with the program. With GMOs he didn't say the jury's out and we should be careful, he railed against the business, scientists, and politicians for being corrupt or incompetent, predicted people would get sick, and so on.

I don't think it's a coincidence that he is an anointed Canadian celebrity with dozens of awards. I think this fuels the behaviour when in reality the more famous people are the more careful they should be about what they say.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Truenorth00

Though I'd argue there's no substitute for good charcoal.

Are we talking about health risks here?

Our fan is always on when the gas burners are on. I'm not too concerned, but I get it.

[Truenorth00]

From one of the editors at Bloomberg NEF:

Chart: passenger electric vehicles are now 10% of total car sales. And most of those sales are pure battery EV, not plug-in hybrid.

https://twitter.com/NatBullard/statu...524875265?s=20

That's global sales for the quarter.

[Innsertnamehere]

I imagine the chip shortage massively cutting new car sales has something to do with it, as much as actual base growth of sales do.

Chips are being prioritized for high profit margin vehicles right now - i.e. electric cars which mostly sell for very large sums.

[WarrenC12]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I imagine the chip shortage massively cutting new car sales has something to do with it, as much as actual base growth of sales do.

Chips are being prioritized for high profit margin vehicles right now - i.e. electric cars which mostly sell for very large sums.

Ford is letting Tesla use their chips, is that what you honestly think?

[Acajack]

David Suzuki has apologized for saying pipelines would be blown up.

[MonctonRad]

Originally Posted by Acajack

David Suzuki has apologized for saying pipelines would be blown up.

Only because his lawyer told him he had to........

[whatnext]

A lot of talk on the BC floods and climate change has focused on the Sumas Prairie. Terrence Corocran in the Financial Post points out why this isn't necessarily just a climate change story:

Terence Corcoran: A human mistake — Why the B.C. floods are not a climate change issue
Instead of preparing for the floods, B.C. and Ottawa spent most of the last few decades revving up the long-range aspects of climate change alarm
Author of the article: Terence Corcoran
Publishing date: Nov 25, 2021

B.C. historian Chad Reimer’s 2018 book, Before We Lost the Lake: A Natural and Human History of Sumas Valley, makes it abundantly clear that the massive flooding that has devastated one of Canada’s most important farm and transportation regions should have come as no surprise.

Among the final words in Reimer’s remarkable and detailed history of the flooded British Columbia geography — now embedded in the minds of Canadians is a sign of catastrophic climate change — is a warning. Reimer concludes that the complacency running through Abbotsford and other communities in the Sumas area prior to last week’s floods has been unfounded. “This sense of security is faulty,” said Reimer in 2018.

Before We Lost the Lake is filled with evidence of the seemingly futile hundred-year human struggle to tame Sumas Lake by draining it of water and turning it into fertile prairie, a never-ending battle to build and re-build dikes and infrastructure in the face of recurring flood episodes of varying magnitudes going back centuries. Sumas and areas south of the United States border have experienced so-called 100-year floods in 1908-1909 and 1932. Floods ranked as 35-year events occurred in 1945, 1949,1955,1975, and 1990. At least a dozen others are on the record......

https://financialpost.com/opinion/te...e-change-issue

[Truenorth00]

It's interesting how climate change deniers like Corcoran went from, "Climate change isn't real," to "why haven't you liberal morons solved it yet?", Without so much as taking a breath...

Also, it's funny how the folks who say this can all be handled with adaptation are so silent now. Apparently, they aren't that willing to spent on adaptation either. Just toss, now flood prone communities, under the bus.