On October 18, 2019 at 14:54, djy said...
The trolling comment was not meant as a slur; it was merely an expression of my disbelief at what I believe to be your not appreciating the extremity of an ice age.
I agree it is enormous, I just also realise that
1) when one looks at the past, warming has always been a bigger disaster then cooling. Like I said, and you mocked, mammoths and the rest and the great extinction did not happen when the ice age was staring, it did not happen when it was at its peak, it happened with the warming.
2) no one in his right mind is talking about entering a new ice age. so it is a bit ridiculous fretting over nothing.
Extreme weather events occur all the time. Here are just two examples:
[Link: en.wikipedia.org][Link: en.wikipedia.org] Both occurred long before CO
2 became an issue.
yes extreme weather does happen and yes it can have natural causes (like volcanos erupting, sun spots....) but your examples don't really work well since both of them happened after the start of the industrial revolution. If its pollution and the coal burning was enough to change the pepper moth how do you know that it did not also played a role in those incidents?
Given all the information I've previously provided, I'm at a loss to understand why you still believe "Green Energy" is universally cheap.
you have not shown any evidence, you have rambled on but you miss the point each time by focusing on what is there instead of what could be there.
Clearly your hydropower is, though I wonder if the price Quebec customers pay is discounted against the amount paid by the export market.
I agree our electricity is cheap. But (like most of this conversation) you are completely wrong.
[Link: cbc.ca]The Quebec government is expected to force Hydro-Québec to return $1.5 billion to customers who have been overpaying the Crown corporation for electricity.
we have technically been over charged for the last decade. And no where near subsidized (in any real way) with exports.
I say "real way" because like you said we are few and far between and so we most likely would not have been able to do the projects if it was just for the Quebec market. But those other markets (and industry) pay less per kWh than I do.
The UK energy market, however, is an entirely different beast.
agree and there in lies the problem ;)
As previously mentioned, ... At present, the market price for electricity is approximately £45 per MWh...
but that is the point you are looking at the past you need to look at the present and the future
[Link: carbonbrief.org]In the third quarter of 2019, the UK’s windfarms, solar panels, biomass and hydro plants generated more electricity than the combined output from power stations fired by coal, oil and gas, Carbon Brief analysis reveals.
During the three months of July, August and September, renewables generated an estimated total of 29.5 terawatt hours (TWh), compared with just 29.1TWh from fossil fuels, the analysis shows.
[Link: independent.co.uk]12 new energy projects coming in at a record low price of between £39.65 and £41.61 per megawatt hour, the government revealed on Friday.
That is less than half of the £92.50 per megawatt hour that the government has committed to pay for power from the delayed and over-budget Hinkley Point C nuclear plant which is due to open in 2025.
Because electricity is the most expensive means by which to heat the home (and water), most households in the UK use gas - the table graphic being a means to illustrate the scale of the differential. Natural gas, however, is a fossil fuel and recent legislation will see the banning of gas boiler (furnace) installation in new build homes after 2025. This doesn't directly affect me (at least for the moment), but that was never my concern.
I get what you are saying and I agree. In the UK right now it does not make sense to heat electrically. What you are missing is that there was a time , not so long ago, when that was the case here as well which is why my houce was built with an oil furnace and later updated to bi-energy (electric+oil) and only recently I went full electric. Quebec usd to have more of its electricity that fossil fuel based and at first it was going to go nuclear and until very recently those two nuclear stations were creating expensive electricity.
No serious scientist or observer is claiming that the world has not warmed,
cool we agree on that
but it's cynical political opportunism feeding the belief that CO2 is the sole culprit and that by controlling its emissions we can control the climate.
but who is saying sole culprit? from the every beginning when you asked why CO
2 I said it I not the only one but the easiest o deal with. Either you do nothing, procrastinate and only start reacting wen it is too late or you need to start somewhere.
If, as you appear to believe, climate change played a role in the Montreal flooding, surely you should be lobbying your government to implement a flood mitigation/prevention programme,
Quebec redraw flood maps this year
Offered to buy the homes (up to 200k which is very little for a home) in the new flood zones.
not expecting other countries to impoverish themselves in the pure blind hope it will stop the flooding.
I am not, like I said repeatedly it is too late for these people. my question is what impoverishment would happen if the UK needs to redraw flood zones and needs to buy out people living in places like London the same way Quebec needed to do right now)
