An interview with David Spratt about the solution to climate change (Climate Code Red). This is an online version of a script that will be published in Germany by Energiewende Magazin. David is an Australian who has spent decades doing research on climate change and issuing public warnings about the potentially catastrophic dangers of the current course of activity. I believe what he has to say about the more worrisome views of many climate scientists is generally accurate, and that his criticism of the IPCC is appropriate. He is a very serious man, well worth reading. (I will have some comments to follow that express some minor differences.)
Now, let’s examine how shilajit capsule can cure male reproductive and urinary method illnesses and males’ buy cialis tablet urinary system diseases. This became a drug for erectile dysfunction by boosting blood flow into the penis. canada in levitra When levitra generic vardenafil a man is sexually simulated, nerves fire in your brain and travel across your spinal cord to the penile muscles. If you want more Beautiful Skin, a younger-looking appearance, it fights inflammation, it yields better cholesterol levelsandincreases mental free cialis sample unica-web.com focus.
.
Comments: I see no reason to believe that the global temperature increase can be held to 1.5C by any possible means. We are at 1.2C right now (see yesterday’s letter) and even if there are no more emissions at all, Earth’s current energy imbalance must be corrected over time in a natural way, adding another half degree or so of warming before rebalancing is completed (or when we stop storing more and more heat in the oceans). That imbalance could theoretically also be corrected by an absolute reduction in the total content of greenhouse gases in the atmosphere, the prospect of which is effectively zero without some kind of miracle. At the moment we are adding to those gases by record amounts, even as we are actively seeking to achieve some kind of slowdown. In that respect, every success in one place or category is effectively offset by a failure somewhere else. (See the story below about SUV sales as a sad example.)
.
David talks about the need to mobilize global society on a scale comparable to the way societies mobilized for World War II, which would be very helpful in principle, but he doesn’t fill in the details about what that means in practice. Think about the amount of consumption that people everywhere would need to give up, in a timely way, in order to make it happen. Governments could force something like that to happen, but democratic governments would likely do so only if prompted by actual public demand for those cuts, something not not visible on any horizon, and autocratic governments are not known for leaning that way on their own initiative.
‘
Individuals can still do a lot of things on their own in the way of cutting energy consumption and taking steps to protect the environment, while urging other individuals to do the same, a practice that could use more encouragement whether or not it makes a real difference. Also, making an effort to gain deeper knowledge of the predicament we are in, and its probable consequences, by taking time to study the science itself, is something better pursued than avoided. Having plans ready for future adaptation to a worst-case scenario can be personally useful and maybe also serve to spread a useful message to others.
—–
Growing preference for SUVs challenges emissions reductions in passenger car market (a commentary based on the forthcoming World Energy Outlook 2019). In short, electric car sales around the world are growing rapidly, but so are SUV sales. “Bigger and heavier cars, like SUVs, are harder to electrify and growth in their rising demand may slow down the development of clean and efficient car fleets. The development of SUV sales given its substantial role in oil demand and CO2 emissions would affect the outlook for passenger cars and the evolution of future oil demand and carbon emissions…..If consumers’ appetite for SUVs continues to grow at a similar pace seen in the last decade, SUVs would add nearly 2 million barrels a day in global oil demand by 2040, offsetting the savings from nearly 150 million electric cars.”
—–
Cutting subsidies on oil and gas sales in less-developed countries is not a viable option (Climate Home News). This experience brings home a lesson: In places like Ecuador, both subsidy cuts and high carbon taxes, without compensation, as a means of reducing energy demand, would need to be limited to the wealthiest classes—with still uncertain reactions.
Carl
