Just the Facts is a discussion of current world events from the point of view of someone who lives on the fringe of polite society, just plain old oil field trash.
More Paris 2105 opinion which no doubt will remain suppressed. I note with glee that the Dauphin and his entire entourage including all of the Provincial Premiers and their entourages will be attending the soiree in Paris next month. It is sad that Alison Redford may have to pay her own way. I wonder if they can get enough rooms at the George V.
As anyone who follows Global Warming politics and scholasticism (I have given up on the science which has been driven from the discussion by mainstream green activists, organizations and corporations). The Paris Festival COP21 is not gathering the same amount of interest but here is an interesting article about what is going on behinds the scenes and it also touches on activist jurists who are trying to do what the activist scientists failed to do, muzzle scientific method.
Good Morning: I clipped this out of Guardian - it is hard to resist the predictions of the end of the world.
Let's go and see what the flacks at the UN are pushing out in advance of their next big wing ding in Paris.
Regards,
J
World will pass crucial 2C global warming limit, experts warn
Carbon pledges from 147 nations to Paris climate summit ‘are not enough to stop temperature rise’, experts conclude
Pledges by nations to cut carbon emissions will fall far short of
those needed to prevent global temperatures rising by more than the
crucial 2C by the end of the century. This is the stark conclusion of
climate experts who have analysed submissions in the runup to the Paris climate talks later this year.
A rise of 2C is considered the most the Earth could tolerate without
risking catastrophic changes to food production, sea levels, fishing,
wildlife, deserts and water reserves. Even if rises are pegged at 2C,
scientists say this will still destroy most coral reefs and glaciers and
melt significant parts of the Greenland ice cap, bringing major rises
in sea levels.
“We have had a global temperature rise of almost 1C since the
industrial revolution and have already seen widespread impacts that have
had real consequences for people,” said climate expert Professor Chris
Field of Stanford University. “We should therefore be striving to limit
warming to as far below 2C as possible. However, that will require a
level of ambition that we have not yet seen.”
In advance of the COP21 United Nations climate talks to be held in
Paris from 30 November to 11 December, every country was asked to submit
proposals on cutting use of fossil fuels in order to reduce their
emissions of greenhouses gases and so tackle global warming. The
deadline for these pledges was 1 October.
A total of 147 nations made submissions, and scientists have since
been totting up how these would affect climate change. They have
concluded they still fall well short of the amount needed to prevent a
2C warming by 2100, a fact that will be underlined later this week when
the Grantham Research Institute releases its analysis of the COP21
submissions. This will show that the world’s carbon emissions, currently
around 50bn tonnes a year, will still rise over the next 15 years, even
if all the national pledges made to the UN are implemented. The
institute’s figures suggest they will reach 55bn to 60bn by 2030.
To put that figure in context, the world will have to cut emissions
to 36bn billion tonnes of carbon to have a 50-50 chance of keeping
temperatures below 2C, scientists have calculated. Current pledges will
not bring the planet near that reduced output. Developed nations may
pledge to make increasing use of renewable energy sources but as more
developing nations become industrialised, carbon outputs continue to
rise overall. And there is no prospect of nations now changing their
carbon pledges before or during the Paris talks.
The world is therefore falling well short of its carbon target –
though there are some grounds for relative optimism. A study of COP21
pledges by Climate Action Tracker, (CAT) an independent scientific group
of European climate experts, indicates that if all pledges are
implemented, then global temperatures will rise by 2.7C. The group
revealed that this is a significant improvement on the warming it
predicted last year. “Our December update included pledges and informal
announcements by China, the US and the EU, and we estimated an average
global warming level of 3.1C,” said CAT member Dr Louise Jeffery of the
Potsdam Institute for Climate Impact Research. “The biggest contributing
factors to the change in our temperature estimate have been China and
India.”
These
nations had been on track to become major carbon emitters but this year
issued pledges that have raised hopes they will greatly curtail their
outputs, increasing some negotiators’ hopes for Paris.
This point was backed by climate economist Lord Stern: “We can
already see that the pledges by ational governments will mean emissions
after 2020 will fall far short of cuts needed to have a reasonable
chance of avoiding global warming of more than 2C. It is essential,
therefore, that a legal agreement is agreed at the COP21 talks in order
to create a process after Paris through which countries will review
their efforts and find ways to ramp up their actions on reducing
emissions.”
A major stumbling block facing negotiators at Paris will be finance.
Developed nations – who are responsible for most carbon emissions – have
to find ways to pay developing nations so that they can adopt renewable
energy technologies and find ways to cope with changes in their
environments. Given that this will cost hundreds of billions of dollars,
there is considerable room for political fallout. Nevertheless, Field
remained optimistic: “The climate change problem is one that can be
solved. We have the technologies, the resources – we just need to make
the commitment.”
This is so classic I have to add Ted Cruz's questioning of Aaron Mair of the Sierra Club to my blog. Now you see what the problem in with Global Warming; "My mind is made up don't confuse me with facts." Science, at least "Climate Science" may never recover from this kind of thinking shown by Aaron Mair.
Thanks to Small Dead Animals for putting me onto this.
Here is a blast from the past. When we think of the hysteria of Global Warming and we remember this move by the EPA; the real question should be "How long can we hold our breath?"
Sitting here I think of Henning Mankell and his life. I enjoyed his Kurt Wallander novels. He was a different kind of guy, perhaps the archetypal Swede, left wing, well meaning. His writing - I only read the translated works - really cemented my interest in the detective noire genre. He gave me hours of discussion with my friend from Fernie, Jimmy.
Last weekend I was dragged to two new movies, Everest and The Martian. Both were excellent but I finally figured out why movies start at such weird times, you have to fit in all the ads prior to the show. In the middle of the ads was one for GLOBALGOALS.ORG.
Here is a screen grab from their website:
World Leaders have committed to 17 Global Goals to achieve 3 extraordinary things in the next 15 years. End extreme poverty.Fight inequality & injustice.Fix climate change. The Global Goals for sustainable development could get these things done. In all countries. For all people. If the Goals are going to work, everyone needs to know about them. TELL EVERYONE.
The graphics and tone are aimed at kids, only kids could imagine that a organization that has failed so consistently over the last 70 years could accomplish this. I keep thinking of Rwanda. I also want to know how they think they can accomplish their goals, just big Agenda 21 dreamers. I keep wondering about who is going to create climate status quo?
