Federated Farmers has objected to the emphasis on farming as the key cause of accelerated erosion and poor water-quality. The submission also raises concerns about the impact of some provisions, particularly nutrient leaching targets on the viability of farming in the Manawatu-Wanganui
Using numbers from the US DOE, China alone will be emitting ~25Gt CO2 by yr 2050, in a 'bus. as usual' scenario, or ~19Gt in an 'extreme austerity' scenario. This ignores The other 2 economies which will have passed the US in CO2 emissions by then. Compare that with ENTIRE WORLD CO2 emissions of a mere 8Gt for the yr 2005 from CDIAC. Given the reality of the above numbers, which are NOT disputed, what kind of fool could possibly believe that it's possible to trim CO2 emissions by ANY amount?
"But as Sharon Begley points out, just to limit atmospheric concentrations to 450 ppm, nations would have to build 10,000 new nuclear power plantsone every other day from now until 2050plus a mind boggling 1 million solar roof top panels per day from now until 2050. Even then, 450 ppm is attainable only if global energy efficiency improves by a 500%, population grows only to 9 billion (instead of 10 billion or 11 billion), and global GDP grows at an anemic (near recession) rate of 1.6%/year."
This has been flagged as spam show
lobbyist will preventing these changes...
Federated Farmers has objected to the emphasis on farming as the key cause of accelerated erosion and poor water-quality. The submission also raises concerns about the impact of some provisions, particularly nutrient leaching targets on the viability of farming in the Manawatu-Wanganui
Scooternz 6 months ago
Do people actually still believe this shit? Thank you guys for contributing to the collapse of the US economy!
panzerkilla 1 year ago
Using numbers from the US DOE, China alone will be emitting ~25Gt CO2 by yr 2050, in a 'bus. as usual' scenario, or ~19Gt in an 'extreme austerity' scenario. This ignores The other 2 economies which will have passed the US in CO2 emissions by then. Compare that with ENTIRE WORLD CO2 emissions of a mere 8Gt for the yr 2005 from CDIAC. Given the reality of the above numbers, which are NOT disputed, what kind of fool could possibly believe that it's possible to trim CO2 emissions by ANY amount?
jimrennison1 1 year ago
"But as Sharon Begley points out, just to limit atmospheric concentrations to 450 ppm, nations would have to build 10,000 new nuclear power plantsone every other day from now until 2050plus a mind boggling 1 million solar roof top panels per day from now until 2050. Even then, 450 ppm is attainable only if global energy efficiency improves by a 500%, population grows only to 9 billion (instead of 10 billion or 11 billion), and global GDP grows at an anemic (near recession) rate of 1.6%/year."
russttu 2 years ago
We are at 387ppm. You are advocating for a 100% reduction in c02 coupled with unnatural sequestration levels. Very interesting from a "scientist"
russttu 2 years ago
You should stay in class and study harder.
See "What does a reduction to 350 PPM of CO2 get you?" post with graphs at WattsUpWithThat com
marjan15 2 years ago
Haha awesome. I was in the middle prong of the 3
kawiikoneko 2 years ago
I was there.. top right corner of the 0... it was so fun and a great exchange for classes =]
inubaby617 2 years ago
Thank you 'anthlanty' and 'sanfatale' for your comments. Not sure who left that bag, was too far away, at the top of the cable car.
schritzy 2 years ago
AWESOME!
sanfatale 2 years ago
Awesome stuff! I wonder who left a bag in the middle of the park when the video was playing backwards?
anthlanty 2 years ago