tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post732838488658595252..comments2024-03-22T05:20:44.167-07:00Comments on The Disaffected Lib: Asleep at the WheelThe Mound of Soundhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/09023839743772372922noreply@blogger.comBlogger6125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post-60982561989302557662019-11-30T09:22:25.132-08:002019-11-30T09:22:25.132-08:00For example tourism, which is an important part of...For example tourism, which is an important part of the BC economy, runs on fossil fuels.<br /><br />Tourism is all about cruise ships, air planes, buses, trains, cars, trucks, skidoos, motorboats, motorcycles, all of which run on fossil fuels.<br /><br />Some seem to think it's possible to ramp down fossil fuel use and grow the GDP at the same time, which is nonsensical and delusional.Hughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post-54076023815300388802019-11-30T08:00:06.260-08:002019-11-30T08:00:06.260-08:00A recent article mentioned BC's govt budget su...A recent article mentioned BC's govt budget surplus. <br /><br />I emailed the author and was told the debt to GDP ratio was what they looked at, not the total BC govt debt, which is growing exponentially at 4.4% per year.<br /><br />The BC budget shows GDP growing at 4.7% per year, keeping the all-important debt/GDP ratio stable.<br /><br />Using the divide into 72 rule, BC debt would double in 16 years, BC GDP would double in 15 years. <br /><br />So, everything will be fine as long as GDP grows exponentially.<br /><br />Meanwhile we need to ramp down fossil fuels, which are currently powering the economy.<br /><br />Hughnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post-55841259942615187352019-11-28T12:45:16.194-08:002019-11-28T12:45:16.194-08:00Yes, the iceberg part will be wrong. I doubt we...Yes, the iceberg part will be wrong. I doubt we'll even see icecubes by then.<br /><br />CapAnonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post-60376000028407251722019-11-28T07:24:57.195-08:002019-11-28T07:24:57.195-08:00.. in Canada eh.. any pathway or route to environm..... in Canada eh.. any pathway or route to environmental or climate sanity.. re-valuation or redemption in the future, runs straight through OUR Federal Parliament and OUR Provincial Legislatures.. and.. I will never use the term 'Enemy' lightly.. or 'Public Servant' lightly either.. especially linked in the same sentence re our 'Honorable' elected MP's and MPL's, but I fear that is where OUR governance has retreated or metastisized to. That of course requires a cold hard examination of THEIR political parties.. Are those parties in any way OURS.. ?? Oh please show me a shred of evidence of their connection to US..<br /><br />Flashing back to your great 'lifeboat' analogy.. I see the Captain and Leading Officers loading up the most seaworthy boat with provisions, charts, compass, water, any precious cargo, spare canvas, rum, life jackets, fishing line, tobacco, shop's log.. abandoning US on an ice floe, scuttling the ship and lifeboats, as below the waterline its rotted, wormy anyway, due to ludicrous due care.. and declaring 'All's Well' and punting off gaily in the captain's pinnace to a nearby American shore. WE are left shivering and adrift in the fog, icy waters, mist and currents in a truly busy shipping lane amidst iceburgs, supertankers and container ships.<br /><br />Do I have this wrong ?the salamanderhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06853337802990122289noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post-26163621475913214702019-11-28T06:12:22.864-08:002019-11-28T06:12:22.864-08:00Cap, it troubles me deeply that I can't refute...Cap, it troubles me deeply that I can't refute your argument. Unfortunately, all of that is true. <br /><br />OPEC and the IEA are both predicting a rosy and profitable future for fossil fuels, including thermal coal, at least out to the 2040s. That will blow right through the carbon budget. <br /><br />I've been writing for years that there can be no real success on the greenhouse gas front that doesn't also tackle overpopulation and our insanely rapacious overconsumption of the planet's resources, renewable and non-. The three are tightly interwoven. You must effectively address all three if you're to have any hope on even one of them. We have to retreat until we're once again in harmony with our finite biosphere, nature.<br /><br />I don't know what to expect from next week's UN COP climate summit but I don't expect it to chart out some global strategy on overpopulation or excess consumption.<br /><br />One of the greatest failures of climate scientists may turn out to be their until very recent reluctance to discuss the climate crisis in the broader context of these companion existential threats. They should have been taking that comprehensive approach ten, if not twenty, years ago.<br /><br />I think I'll pen an essay on the inability of our modern, global civilization to handle the really dangerous problems of the day. Most everyone is willing to do a little, few are willing to do a great deal, and, in most cases, what is proposed ignores the urgency that demands rapid responses. We're fiddling. Rome burns.The Mound of Soundhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09023839743772372922noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-32931256.post-65408695112882775282019-11-27T12:54:43.528-08:002019-11-27T12:54:43.528-08:00Not only are we doubling down on fossil fuels, we&...Not only are we doubling down on fossil fuels, we're actually giving up on renewables! Ford spent $231 million to cancel Ontario's renewable energy projects. But it's not just Ontario. As <a href="https://www.motherjones.com/kevin-drum/2019/11/the-world-is-giving-up-on-climate-change/" rel="nofollow"> Kevin Drum</a> reports:<br /><i><br />Europe is pulling back from clean energy research. India and Brazil barely have any to begin with. The United States is flat at about $50 billion—maybe a tenth of what we should be spending. And China, after a decade of research, has decided to double down on coal and slash its clean energy R&D. </i><br /><br />We're looking at 4-5 degrees of warming in the second half of the century. It's clear that the Masters of the Universe have decided that corporate profits now are more important than averting global catastrophe.<br /><br />CapAnonymousnoreply@blogger.com