Climate Change
Cool, but also missing the point somewhat. You often work in binaries; left, right, red, blue. The way forward is complex and nuanced, not black and white. We are not going to get there by ignoring renewables. Gas will be part of the mix no doubt but the investment that counts in the long run will be in renewables. Backup base load for the “what ifs” and bad days will be part of things but not the main answer. It’s my kids and your kids future. Let’s not fuck it up totally for them.
yes Robwilliams, that's a really good story. I've been watching it for a while, so it is good to see the scale-up from the trial stage.
there is no doubt in my mind that biochar, from many and various sources, including the biosolids example in this story, is a key part of the carbon drawdown solution. All councils should be learning from this example.
Whatever comes of climate change and the renewables debate, I think everyone must concede that the very issue has created a surge in new technology and thinking, as evidenced by Rob William's link above, but also many other examples of accessing energy and harnessing waste.
Much of it is ingenious and only arose out of constant pressure and adversarial argument.
More power to the antagonists.
blackers wrote:Cool, but also missing the point somewhat. You often work in binaries; left, right, red, blue. The way forward is complex and nuanced, not black and white.
Hallelujah blackers.
Of course gas peaker’s will still be around for a while yet, almost certainly govt owned as they won’t be able to be profitable if they’re only running a few weeks per year. As to when the last one gets shut down, it is impossible to forecast. Who knows what will be invented by then.
The sooner we can shut down coal burners the better.
While technology will bring unknowable achievements in the next 28 years, the existing technology of wind, solar and pumped hydro can be deployed to cover our entire energy needs into the future.
An ANU professor looking Into pumped hydro found something like 27,000 potential sites in Australia. We would need a few hundred at most, most of them quite small, distributed is best.
That’s without using batteries. Batteries just adds to the mix.
The technology exists, now. The political will, not so much.
Someone will invent a better mousetrap, eventually. Or a better political system.
The beautiful thing is the cat is well and truly out of the bag. People are looking at and developing alternatives. The more they do, the more the uptake their can be. Theirs no going back in a sense. Momentum and action is advancing as it is becoming undeniable that other concepts are out there. Waiting to be embraced. Love seeing science being used in bringing about healthy change.
flollo wrote:Nice!
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-05-03/atlassian-billionaire-invests-in-...
Walking his talk. Good work.
blackers wrote:Cool, but also missing the point somewhat. You often work in binaries; left, right, red, blue. The way forward is complex and nuanced, not black and white. We are not going to get there by ignoring renewables. Gas will be part of the mix no doubt but the investment that counts in the long run will be in renewables. Backup base load for the “what ifs” and bad days will be part of things but not the main answer. It’s my kids and your kids future. Let’s not fuck it up totally for them.
Blockers. All good points, wouldn’t waste your time with Mr Cut & Paster ID.he will refute anything you post, just likes the sound of his own voice.
Prior to his death in 2000, Australia’s most celebrated physicist, Sir Marcus Oliphant once deduced that if you covered an area the size of South Australia with solar panels, it could fuel the worlds energy needs. We DONT need top up gas plants, coal etc. Simply put just more renewables, sick of hearing this piss poor argument that alternative energy sources need back up all the time. If we had heeded Bob Browns advice 40 years ago suggesting that Australia invest in renewables back then, we may not be having this nauseating discussion about gas and coal again. Moreover Bob suggested that we could have started our own hubs of manufacture and be in a position today as a global supplier of hardware for all things renewable, but no, slow, backwards Australia with its policies in the two steps forward three backwards mode that existed then and still does today, we missed the boat.
Robwilliams wrote:Abc news
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-07-27/more-western-ground-parrots-trans...
Robwilliams, thanks for highlighting this to the Swellnet. Great news.
Nationally and globally bird numbers are and have been on a massive decline.
I collect temporal and spatial bird data (in Australia) twice a day everyday for the worlds largest ornithological depository at Cornell University, Ithaca, upstate New York. This latest news about the Ground Parrot is very heartening as is the great news that in the last two years, the extremely rare Night Parrot has been rediscovered in the east Pilbara region. I was privileged enough to be able to watch a Zoom presentation recently from the guys who located the birds after decades. Total admiration for their perseverance, patience and enduring efforts.
This highlights again the need for Australia to halt this gross land clearing that’s unabated and doesn’t look like slowing down. We have now cleared half of our countries vegetation, Shame on Australia.
So chuffed to see the win for the community in Shellharbour, Killalea State Park, it’s small parcels of land like this that are being cleared daily across our nation, they all add up.
Labor showing that despite making noises to the contrary, it’s business as usual.
AndyM wrote:Labor showing that despite making noises to the contrary, it’s business as usual.
Yep, pretty disappointing.
soggydog wrote:AndyM wrote:Labor showing that despite making noises to the contrary, it’s business as usual.
Yep, pretty disappointing.
Yep very disappointing, but I guess not surprising. Fossil fuel companies won't stop until they have destroyed the planet..... Sad.
And politics as normal enabling it.
The last thing i want to do is stick up for labor, but i think a lot of people have unrealistic expectations and outlooks on this issue, in part i think that's due to simplified messages sent out by others.
These fossil fuel companies only explore and seek more fields due to demand, that demand comes from everyone and while energy use makes up a decent chunk of the use/demand, oil and even gas is used in all kinds of products many people would never think are related.
While most of know how widely used oil is to make thousands of products including surfboards, wetsuits, fins, sunglasses ect
Even natural gas is used to make fertilizer, antifreeze, plastics, pharmaceuticals and fabrics. It is also used to manufacture a wide range of chemicals such as ammonia, methanol, butane, ethane, propane, and acetic acid.
Unless you are one of those people that are completely changing your lifestyle and making a huge effort to seek alternative products in every single aspect of your life and for some things actually go without like that trip to Indo, really you are part of the problem because you are part of the demand.
Or just becoming more aware of the deals that seal. Yes everyone uses fossil fuels but the shift is underway. If Australia can't manage government to the benefit of it's people what hope have we got expecting it resources won't be squandered and pilfered as has been the case. We are miles behind other countries in regards to transitioning. Most see the benefits and negatives being played out. Allot of people are making change were they can regardless of government. Like you often say this all or nothing approach no longer stacks up in todays world. People want a cleaner healthier future and as environmental pressures become greater so will the concern. If we can't accept the need or find a desire to improve our demands on fossil fuels we aren't progressing to a better cleaner future. I understand not everything is sustainable at the moment environmentally but this all or nothing approach as to why we should not attempt to improve scientific forecast is a little short sighted. Keep mining, burning, raping and pillaging, in one way it's economically strong and in another it is catastrophic. We reap what we sow. Time will tell regardless of what I or you think. But don't tell me it wasn't forecast through vigour-us study over time. Every effort counts to build momentum to change just as every effort does to stifle it.
Reality is the environments, will show the signs either of positive or negative change. As they have world wide.
abc news
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-25/bass-strait-seismic-testing-plan-...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-25/cadia-gold-mine-orange-fined-maxi...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/2022-08-25/researchers-slam-swift-parrot-rec...
https://www.abc.net.au/news/science/2022-08-24/mountain-ash-trees-climat...
If economics is the argument for why it should not be done I hate to see the future fallout or maybe I'll just grab a beer and have a laugh with those that tried whilst one weak excuse get's rolled out after another. We won't be able to hide. Excuses will be just excuses in the face of a more alarming situation environmentally. I look forward to evaluating the shit show that could have some what been prevented or limited in some areas.
Robwilliams wrote:. We are miles behind other countries in regards to transitioning. .
Apologies if im reading this comment wrong, but im assuming you mean transitioning to renewables?
If so, that's factually incorrect.
Per captia we (Australia) lead's the world in solar generated energy and per captia fourth for wind energy generation and we are number one in the world for roof top solar, not sure exactly where we sit for storage but in 2017 when set up Hornsdale Power Reserve in SA was the worlds biggest lithium battery and we have all kinds of storage projects in the works for pumped hydro and green hydrogen ect.
Our renewable uptake rate is also one of the fastest in the world.
Below is the percentage of solar generated in 2021 at 12% id expect higher by now.
https://www.pv-magazine-australia.com/2022/03/31/australia-leads-world-a...
Record breaking days across the US..
Today is the peak of California's worst September heatwave ever recorded.
— Colin McCarthy (@US_Stormwatch) September 6, 2022
The number of locations recording 110°F+ is simply extraordinary.
Many major cities have experienced their hottest day ever recorded, including San Jose and Santa Rosa. #Heatwave2022 pic.twitter.com/QIZQH58Hcn
Extreme heat in California today (Tuesday). Sacramento hit 116ºF (46.7ºC), beating its all-time record of 114ºF (45.6ºC) from July 17, 1925. Death Valley's Furnace Creek reached 125.2ºF (51.8ºC), just 0.4ºC below the September world record.
— Ben Domensino (@Ben_Domensino) September 7, 2022
More details: https://t.co/Z0BHa3MeGn pic.twitter.com/0Bb7XuA1ZA
"Death Valley's Furnace Creek reached 125.2ºF (51.8ºC), just 0.4ºC below the September world record."
Who’d have thought that Death Valley’s Furnace Creek would get hot?
Time to hide under the bed again for sure.
Yeah not quite. Here's some perspective.
Here's one way to visualize just how extreme this CA heatwave is - Sacramento has a GHCN station with data back to 1877.
— Tomer Burg (@burgwx) September 7, 2022
In these 145 years, Sacramento never recorded a September temperature at/above 110F. Today's all-time record heat also broke the Sept record by a big margin! https://t.co/WuFIca1PaO pic.twitter.com/4mskFqY4l8
Obviously those historical figures do not account for the urban heat island effect. It’s therefore trite to try compare the temperatures, particularly as the EXTREME heat is not really unsurprising over that short a time span.
It’d be extremely surprising if every decade wasnt hotter than the preceding one due to urban heat island effect alone. The recent high temp is neither outlandishly outsized or unexpected.
Either way…..meh.
this charismatic mofo lays it out street like.
Thanks Bonza, appreciated. Covers quite a lot there.
Waveman, really?
Here, have a read of this article which debunks old mate Patrick Moore who didn't found Greenpeace
"He describes himself as a co-founder of Greenpeace but the environmental group refutes this claim. In 2010, it issued a statement saying: “Although Mr Moore played a significant role in Greenpeace Canada for several years, he did not found Greenpeace”.
https://www.aap.com.au/factcheck/climate-sceptics-shot-at-aussie-data-mi...
Ive listened to countless Patrick Moore videos, interviews, podcast over the years, he definitely played a big role in Green peace early years (fair to call him one of the founder's ) and i think a lot of his views about Green peace basically being influenced by politics, driven by money ignoring some topics in favour of other topics that sell better etc is hard to argue with. (much of what's mentioned in article, that damn i had to subscribe too just to read)
But i also dont buy into his views on climate change as in the science, he always says exactly the same things almost to the word like its scripted and i think there is a lot of aspects he doesn't explain or ignores, plus in many interviews he also doesn't get pulled up on some things or asked questions that he should, which can be frustrating.
I think there is some that dont deny climate change but make some decent arguments against certain narratives, but to me its not this guy if anyone really is paid by fossil fuel companies, i think he is on the top of the list.
Basically i dont trust him but i dont trust Greenpeace either, both seem to be in it for the money these days..
Personally, regardless of if climate change is true or not, I think it is wise to jump on the bandwagon and fabricate as much data and false narratives and talk it up as much as possible since it’s a major policy tool the West can use to hinder China, India, Africa etc from accessing resources and developing any further and threatening liberal democratic hegemony…hmm I wonder if that’s what’s actually happening…interesting that China just used the Taiwan issue to back out of climate change coordination with the west…
cynical much
A penny for your thoughts
https://www.sbs.com.au/news/article/labor-poised-to-push-through-climate...This morning the climate bill is expected to pass the senate after a marathon week of debate. Senate Leader Penny Wong vented her frustrations at the delay after the Coalition moved to block the Govt's fast-tracking of the vote. "You've had nine years!" #auspol @SBSNews pic.twitter.com/PH52O91HI3
— Naveen Razik (@naveenjrazik) September 8, 2022
Thanks SF haven't seen that, the Coalition have long been Wong
Ok, have they passed this bill or not? I honestly don't care about the Coalition. As he said, they are the leftovers, why is everyone giving them so much attention?
Regenesis by George Monbiot.
I am currently reading this book and it's unbelievably good. I haven't finished it yet but wow, it occupied my thoughts like no other in recent times. I reckon a lot of you would really enjoy it, I highly recommend it.
Broadly, it's about:
'Farming is the world's greatest cause of environmental destruction - and the one we are least prepared to talk about. We criticise urban sprawl, but farming sprawls across thirty times as much land. We have ploughed, fenced and grazed great tracts of the planet, felling forests, killing wildlife, and poisoning rivers and oceans to feed ourselves. Yet millions still go hungry.
Now the food system itself is beginning to falter. But, as George Monbiot shows us in this brilliant, bracingly original new book, we can resolve the biggest of our dilemmas and feed the world without devouring the planet.'
flollo wrote:Ok, have they passed this bill or not? I honestly don't care about the Coalition. As he said, they are the leftovers, why is everyone giving them so much attention?
It got passed today
💥 BREAKING 💥
— Chris Bowen (@Bowenchris) September 8, 2022
The Albanese Government’s Climate Change Bill has just passed the Senate. pic.twitter.com/YewBitaxpm
That's great news. Today is a good day!
“Farming is the world's greatest cause of environmental destruction - and the one we are least prepared to talk about. We criticise urban sprawl, but farming sprawls across thirty times as much land. We have ploughed, fenced and grazed great tracts of the planet, felling forests, killing wildlife, and poisoning rivers and oceans to feed ourselves.”
Yeah, but, but, but, farmers are fixing the problem, just ask Angus
bonza wrote:cynical much
Gday bonza, hope you're well.
I'd actually question who's the cynical (and stupid) ones in the climate change wars.
A solid proportion of climate change advocates are really just expressing their own hate, anger, negativity and cynicism towards the western hegemonic neoliberal capitalist system that they live in.
But they still drive cars, live in towns and cities, work in offices and other premises, live in houses and units, go to bars and restaurants, have iphones, ipads, furniture and clothes, etc, use the internet, fly on planes, etc...
Climate change is just cringeworthy hypocrisy to the extreme and another covid: something that has been obscured beyond recognition by being politicised, commercialised, woke-ised, etc.
Mostly though, climate change has become weaponised: it is one of the weapons of choice in the last ditch attempt of the western neoliberal capitalist UK/US colonial system to maintain its hegemony, particularly over China.
These developing countries believe that it's not fair that the west was able to exploit, rape and decimate the environment in order to develop the modern societies with high living standards that we have today, but these developing countries are denied that right.
These countries know that climate change is being used as a weapon against them to prevent them from developing and becoming a threat to the west. This is why China just pulled out of climate change coordination (more accurate to describe it as coercion) with the US.
So all these (hypocritical) people who are supporting the climate change issue thinking that they're "bringing down the system" are actually just reinforcing that system's dominance - so they're not just hypocritical but also just blind and stupid.
The real solution starts locally with one's own behaviour and lifestyle.
Those climate scientists are right into the subjugation of developing countries and beating up on China. Oh... and reinforcing the 'system'
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2022/sep/08/world-on-brink-five-...
You are advocating for people to actively engage in disinformation. You are so to quick point out that nothing can be trusted from science and authorities and media yet you promote anarchy and publication of fraudulent information.
There is a strong recognition in the climate space that recognise it’s the rich west countries that overwhelming contributed to a warming planet and therefore it’s the west that should shoulder the majority of action to reduce emissions.
Some men just want to see the world burn.. Don’t they gsco
gsco wrote:These developing countries believe that it's not fair that the west was able to exploit, rape and decimate the environment in order to develop the modern societies with high living standards that we have today, but these developing countries are denied that right.
These countries know that climate change is being used as a weapon against them to prevent them from developing and becoming a threat to the west..
They may perceive it that way but it's not true. Since the IPCC's Second Assessment in the mid-90s it's been policy that Less Developed Countries are allowed greater emissions based on carbon polluting. An acknowledgement that Developed Counties got rich on the back of cheap energy and now LDC's are owed that same right.
The matrix has changed since then as some countries progressed economically and their allowable emissions subsequently reduced.
It's an imperfect metric as cheap energy isn't the only way countries become affluent - could easily argue the Guns Germs and Steel thesis, or the system of government - but it has been policy for close to three decades. I often read FB posts from people decrying the imbalance, but they're wholly unaware of this quasi quota system, which is attempting to balance rates of progress.
The long game is, as I think Bonza is alluding to, that it's likely living standards will drop everywhere unless collective action is taken. Also, even if AGM isn't real, energy independence will lead to a much more stable world - a boon for small to middle powers. In the last few years there have been huge gains in the renewable sector, and they will only increase exponentially.
Acknowledged.
Bonza I was being sarcastic about the disinformation thing.
Climate change is real. It was caused by us, the developed nations, and still predominately is - by the lifestyles that you and I enjoy, take for granted and don’t want to compromise on.
But developing countries should not be denied the right to the same living standards we enjoy.
Looking at basic metrics and relationships between energy usage, emissions, human development, living standards, GDP per capita, in the absence of some kind of absolutely and seemingly miraculous technological innovation, developing nations with their huge populations catching up to our quality of life - for which they have every right - will yield monumental environmental destruction like nothing we’ve seen yet.
In the absence of a technological miracle we as westerners need a complete systematic change in our way of life.
Anyone who advocates for climate change by deflecting responsibility to governments and corporations to do something, and is not making systematic changes to their lives right here and now, or is not spending ever waking moment trying to find that miracle, is living a lie and is not worth taking seriously. But this seems to be 99 out of 100 people.
gsco wrote:Anyone who advocates for climate change by deflecting responsibility to governments and corporations to do something, and is not making systematic changes to their lives right here and now, or is not spending ever waking moment trying to find that miracle, is living a lie and is not worth taking seriously. But this seems to be 99 out of 100 people.
Bollocks, mate.
Which part?
Last paragraph. Not sure how much lived experience you have, but to me that's a cut and paste of the right wing accusation against action. No person is an island in a social system, so we're beholden to the government that rules. We're similarly beholden to the market system that offers (or doesn't offer) choices that fit.
Sure, you can live the life of a hermit. I've seen old uni friends do that, and though it's becoming slightly easier (internet etc.) it's still a mentally tough road - we're social animals after all.
I've also seen many people fall apart at the immense foreboding AGM presents. The clear-eyed view is fucking catastrophic if you dare to look beyond the seasons, the years, and onwards into the life of your children. How do you operate in the here and now knowing that..?
Nah, fuck that, do your bit, try and live a good life, reduce your imprint, pray like fuck that you're wrong, but don't go putting guilt trips on people for "living a lie" and not "taking things seriously".
.