human actions, global climate change, global human solutions
POSTED BY: 1kiki
UPDATED: Sunday, September 6, 2026 19:38
VIEWED: 60750
PAGE 72 of 111
Quote:
Originally posted by second:Quote:Fossil fuel is too cheap and the rich are displaying conspicuous consumption by burning too much fuel. The proper amount of fossil fuel the rich should burn is zero, nada, zip. The proper amount for poor white trash also happens to be zero, just like the amount of sewage the poor should dump into everybody's drinking water supply should be zero.
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
The richest 1% of humanity is responsible for more carbon emissions than the poorest 66%
No shit.
But Democrats are constantly finding ways to punish the poorest 66% instead of fixing the actual problem.
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
Oh yeah? I wonder how many anti-psychotic pills you're supposed to be taking that are being flushed down you're toilet so everybody gets a free buzz, you fucking waste of carbon.
Please die already. I don't need you breathing any more of my oxygen.
--------------------------------------------------
Political correctness is just tyranny, with a smiley face.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Eco-Friendly Breakthrough: Single Atom Catalyst Transforms CO2 Into Ethanol
By Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences | November 21, 2023
A recent breakthrough in CO2 reduction research involves a newly developed Sn-based catalyst that efficiently produces ethanol, representing a significant step forward in renewable energy technology. (Tin is a chemical element with the symbol Sn, in case you are angry poor white trash who doesn't know better.)
The electrochemical CO2 reduction reaction (CO2RR) into carbon-based fuels provides a promising strategy to mitigate CO2 emission and promotes the utilization of renewable energy.
More at https://scitechdaily.com/eco-friendly-breakthrough-single-atom-catalys
t-transforms-co2-into-ethanol/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
Eco-Friendly Breakthrough: Single Atom Catalyst Transforms CO2 Into Ethanol
By Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences | November 21, 2023
A recent breakthrough in CO2 reduction research involves a newly developed Sn-based catalyst that efficiently produces ethanol, representing a significant step forward in renewable energy technology. (Tin is a chemical element with the symbol Sn, in case you are angry poor white trash who doesn't know better.)
The electrochemical CO2 reduction reaction (CO2RR) into carbon-based fuels provides a promising strategy to mitigate CO2 emission and promotes the utilization of renewable energy.
More at https://scitechdaily.com/eco-friendly-breakthrough-single-atom-catalys
t-transforms-co2-into-ethanol/
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
I look forward to the Thunderf00t video debunking this "breakthrough" that probably breaks one if not all the laws of thermodynamics, as these fake stories always do.
I'm sure it will be as successful a venture as the Waterseer or Solar Freakin' Roadways.
But you keep pretending that the dumbest guy in the room outside of Ted is the smartest guy in the room, Mr. Wizard.
I'm so glad for you that you had a "smart"phone so you could google the periodic table and get the symbol for Tin. We're all very impressed with you right now.
--------------------------------------------------
Political correctness is just tyranny, with a smiley face.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:Huh.
Originally posted by second:
Eco-Friendly Breakthrough: Single Atom Catalyst Transforms CO2 Into Ethanol
By Dalian Institute of Chemical Physics, Chinese Academy of Sciences | November 21, 2023
A recent breakthrough in CO2 reduction research involves a newly developed Sn-based catalyst that efficiently produces ethanol, representing a significant step forward in renewable energy technology. (Tin is a chemical element with the symbol Sn, in case you are angry poor white trash who doesn't know better.)
The electrochemical CO2 reduction reaction (CO2RR) into carbon-based fuels provides a promising strategy to mitigate CO2 emission and promotes the utilization of renewable energy.
More at https://scitechdaily.com/eco-friendly-breakthrough-single-atom-catalys
t-transforms-co2-into-ethanol/
What's NOT in the article: "Efficiently" doesn't mean "energy free". In this case, the reaction between formic acid and CO2 is promoted by energy from an electric current.
sECOND, I see you're riding your tech hobby-horse again. Still looking to make a killing on climate tech, hmmm??
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Tiny Fraction Of Global Elites Emit As Much Carbon As Bottom Two-Thirds Of Humanity
Critics who rail against the hypocrisy of wealthy global elites jet-setting on carbon-spewing private planes while pontificating about the need for the rest of us to cut our climate footprints just got a boost from a new study.
Jets airplanes are parked at the Dubendorf Air Base, east of Zurich on Jan. 18, 2023. (Sebastien Bozon/AFP via Getty Images)
It turns out that the world's richest 1 percent emit about the same amount of carbon as the world's poorest two-thirds, according to an analysis from the nonprofit Oxfam International.
This means that a small sliver of global elites, or 77 million people, have produced as much carbon as the 5 billion people that make up the bottom 66 percent by wealth, per the study.
The study also estimates that it would take roughly 1,500 years for someone in the bottom 99 percent to produce as much carbon as the wealthiest billionaires do in just one year.
The study was based on research compiled by the Stockholm Environment Institute (SEI) and examined the emissions of various income groups up to 2019. In summary, it suggested that the private jet-setting class of global leaders and policymakers, who take private planes to lead summits addressing the assumed dangers of climate change, may warrant charges of hypocrisy.
The analysis was published as global leaders prepare to meet for climate talks at the COP28 summit in Dubai later in November, where, much like other climate conferences, some elite participants will likely pontificate on the need for ordinary folk to end their reliance on cheap fossil fuel energy to make their ends meet.
'Ludicrous Hypocrisy'
Global leaders and policymakers fixated on fighting the supposed ills of carbon emissions because of models predicting dangerous climate change have often drawn criticism for their use of carbon-spewing private jets.
For instance, private jet use during last year's meetings in Davos, Switzerland, pushed up carbon emissions by four times over the average week.
During the World Economic Forum (WEF) meeting in Davos between May 22, 2022, and May 26, 2022, 1,040 private jets flew in and out of airports serving Davos, according to a January report by Greenpeace.
The number of jets going in and out of Davos doubled during that week, resulting in 9,700 tons of carbon dioxide emissions, which is equivalent to roughly 350,000 average cars.
The majority of these jets were attributed to private flights undertaken by participants for the WEF meeting.
Klara Maria Schenk, a transport campaigner for Greenpeace’s European mobility campaign, called the private jet use at Davos a “distasteful masterclass of hypocrisy,” given that the WEF claims to be committed to the Paris Climate Target of keeping climate warming to 1.5 degrees Celsius.
“Davos has a perfectly adequate railway station, still these people can’t even be bothered to take the train for a trip as short as 21 [kilometers]. Do we really believe that these are the people to solve the problems the world faces?” Ms. Schenk said.
MORE AT https://www.theepochtimes.com/science/tiny-fraction-of-global-elites-e
mit-as-much-carbon-as-bottom-66-percent-5533213
-----------
"It may be dangerous to be America's enemy, but to be America's friend is fatal." - Henry Kissinger
Loving America is like loving an addicted spouse - SIGNYM
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:It is all about money, Signym. I'm going to go a step further: most people don't know what they are doing because they can't know any more than a pack of chimps knows the meaning of their furry little lives. There is nothing new about that for the last 300,000 years which is why the top 0.1% of humans invented gods to give the lower 99.9% of hairless apes a purpose and a direction in life vastly superior to chimpanzees.
Originally posted by SIGNYM:
sECOND, I see you're riding your tech hobby-horse again. Still looking to make a killing on climate tech, hmmm??
What to Expect at COP28 on Fossil Fuels, Climate Finance, and the Paris Agreement
By Nigel Purvis | November 24, 2023, 6:00 AM
https://foreignpolicy.com/2023/11/24/cop28-climate-change-united-natio
ns-dubai/
The second storm in Dubai could be about money. Traditionally, developed nations have provided funds to developing nations to both help them adapt to climate change and mitigate increases in climate pollution. During COP28, nations are expected to argue over at least three issues relating to this international climate finance.
The first dispute will be over the adequacy of total climate funding. In 2009, donor countries agreed to mobilize by 2020 $100 billion a year to support climate action in the developing world. While international climate finance has more than doubled and some say tripled over this decade and a half, donor nations failed to reach the $100 billion mark until this year, although the official accounting for 2023 may not be known until 2025. Thanks to recent analysis by the International Energy Agency and others, we now know that greening the energy economy will require mobilizing an additional $2.7 trillion annually from public and private sources. It’s difficult to know what share of that total needs to come from public coffers, but most experts agree that $100 billion in public funding will not suffice to decarbonize the developing world; more than double that may be required over the next decade, although there’s no global consensus on the number at this time. Most likely, COP28 will kick the can down the road on a major new funding pledge, such as by agreeing that nations should agree on a new funding target in 2024 or 2025.
The second dispute over money will center on whether developed nations should do a better job of delivering climate aid to the least-developed nations, particularly for climate adaptation and resilience. Today, only a tiny fraction of international climate finance goes to the poorest nations—3.7 percent by some estimates. Rapidly developing emerging economies gobble up the lion’s share. Over the past decade, in addition, only 23 percent of international climate finance funds adaptation and resilience programs instead of emissions mitigation. This is because reducing climate pollution helps people in donor countries, too, whereas most adaptation funding primarily benefits local communities in poor nations. Plus, reducing emissions means less climate change and less need for adaptation. With climate change driving international migration from Africa and elsewhere, however, developed nations are starting to understand the need for more adaptation and resilience funding. But it’s not at all clear that nations are ready to agree at COP28 on how to rebalance climate aid and direct a larger share to the poorest nations.
The third international climate finance controversy at COP28 will relate to operationalizing the new “loss and damage” fund nations agreed in 2022 to create. Unlike traditional climate aid, the loss and damage fund is meant to provide financial assistance to developing nations that are already suffering from adverse climate impacts, such as more severe hurricanes, floods, droughts, and sea level rise. For the past several months, nations have argued over how much money should go into the fund, how the fund should be capitalized, who should decide how funds are spent, and where the funds should sit to protect against waste, fraud, and abuse. Earlier this
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
Originally posted by second:
The United States may prove to be the largest obstacle to reaching agreement on all three of these international climate finance issues. The Biden administration presumably would prefer to delay decisions on big new foreign aid programs until after the U.S. presidential election in November 2024, since Republicans would surely use any new pledges against the president in the general election.
The election is already over and Biden* already lost.
If he were half the man you think he was, he'd just go ahead and do it right now.
And since when has even legality stopped Biden* from passing unpopular policy?
--------------------------------------------------
Political correctness is just tyranny, with a smiley face.
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:With you Trumptards, bluntness is the only effective way to communicate with you: if Trump is not the GOP's candidate in 2024, then Biden will graciously submit if he should lose the election. But if Trump is the GOP's candidate and Biden loses, he should not politely turn the office over to Trump. If Biden doesn't have the intestinal fortitude, the guts, to stop Trump from taking office after Biden loses, he deserves to lose. If Biden won't violently prevent America's own Nazi leadership from taking power, he is a worthless, cowardly person. We will discover who Biden truly is if Trump wins. Keeping it blunt, Biden kills Trump rather than let Trump be President. There have been Presidents who died soon after being sworn in. Trump will be just one more:
Originally posted by 6ixStringJack:Quote:
Originally posted by second:
The United States may prove to be the largest obstacle to reaching agreement on all three of these international climate finance issues. The Biden administration presumably would prefer to delay decisions on big new foreign aid programs until after the U.S. presidential election in November 2024, since Republicans would surely use any new pledges against the president in the general election.
The election is already over and Biden* already lost.
If he were half the man you think he was, he'd just go ahead and do it right now.
And since when has even legality stopped Biden* from passing unpopular policy?
• 1 1841: William Henry Harrison.
• 2 1850: Zachary Taylor.
• 3 1865: Abraham Lincoln.
• 4 1881: James A. Garfield.
• 5 1901: William McKinley.
• 6 1923: Warren G. Harding.
• 7 1945: Franklin D. Roosevelt.
• 8 1963: John F. Kennedy.
• 9 2025: Donald J Trump. (PENDING)
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_presidents_of_the_United_States_
who_died_in_office
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
The Complex Calculus of Clean Energy and Zero Emissions
How Jesse Jenkins is helping Congress get serious about the power grid
By Peter Fairley | 20 Nov 2023
https://spectrum.ieee.org/jesse-jenkins
In the past two years, the U.S. Congress has provided hundreds of billions of dollars to speed the deployment of clean-energy technologies. These investments are one reason why the International Energy Agency (IEA) in September insisted that there’s still hope to hold global temperature rise to 1.5 °C in this century.
Thousands of Washington insiders and climate activists have had a hand in these legislative breakthroughs. Among the most articulate and almost certainly the wonkiest is Jesse Jenkins, a professor of engineering at Princeton University, where he heads the ZERO Lab—the Zero-carbon Energy systems Research and Optimization Laboratory, that is.
In 2021 and 2022, during the high-stakes negotiations over what became the Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act and the Inflation Reduction Act, the ZERO Lab and the San Francisco–based consultancy Evolved Energy Research operated a climate-modeling war room that provided rapid-fire analyses of the likely effects of shifting investments among a smorgasbord of clean-energy technologies. As legislation worked its way through Congress, Jenkins’s team provided elected officials, staffers, and stakeholders with a running tally of the possible trade-offs and payoffs in emissions, jobs, and economic growth.
Jenkins has also helped push Congress to think more seriously about the power grid, releasing a report last year that showed that much of the 43 percent emissions reduction expected by 2030 would be squandered if the United States doesn’t double the pace of transmission upgrades.
As TheWall Street Journal noted in a July 2023 profile, Jenkins has played an “outsized role” in determining where federal cash can have the biggest impact, and politicos like White House clean-energy advisor John Podesta name-drop the professor and his numbers to sell their ideas.
IEEE Spectrum contributing editor Peter Fairley recently spoke with Jenkins via Zoom about where the U.S. energy system needs to go and how the latest energy models can help.
Jesse Jenkins on:
• How REPEAT influenced Congress
• How energy-system modeling has evolved
• Why energy modeling is useful
• The value of open-source energy models
• The importance of power grid expansion
• Climate resiliency for the grid
• The role of HVDC transmission
• How the U.S, can meet its emissions goals
More at https://spectrum.ieee.org/jesse-jenkins
The Joss Whedon script for Serenity, where Wash lives, is Serenity-190pages.pdf at
https://www.mediafire.com/folder/1uwh75oa407q8/Firefly
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME
Quote:
SECOND: It is all about money, Signym. I'm going to go a step further: most people don't know what they are doing because they can't know any more than a pack of chimps knows the meaning of their furry little lives. There is nothing new about that for the last 300,000 years which is why the top 0.1% of humans invented gods to give the lower 99.9% of hairless apes a purpose and a direction in life vastly superior to chimpanzees.
So much for all of your virtue - signaling!!
Money is your god. Whoever invented money is smarter than you bc they gave YOUR life "meaning" when it had none.
Quote:
.... With you Trumptards, bluntness is the only effective way to communicate with you: if Trump is not the GOP's candidate in 2024, then Biden will graciously submit if he should lose the election. But if Trump is the GOP's candidate and Biden loses, he should not politely turn the office over to Trump. If Biden doesn't have the intestinal fortitude, the guts, to stop Trump from taking office after Biden loses, he deserves to lose. If Biden won't violently prevent America's own Nazi leadership from taking power, he is a worthless, cowardly person. We will discover who Biden truly is if Trump wins. Keeping it blunt, Biden kills Trump rather than let Trump be President. There have been Presidents who died soon after being sworn in. Trump will be just one more:
• 1 1841: William Henry Harrison.
• 2 1850: Zachary Taylor.
• 3 1865: Abraham Lincoln.
• 4 1881: James A. Garfield.
• 5 1901: William McKinley.
• 6 1923: Warren G. Harding.
• 7 1945: Franklin D. Roosevelt.
• 8 1963: John F. Kennedy.
• 9 2025: Donald J Trump (PENDING)
I see you let REAVERBOT out today. Did you have a less- than- stellar Thanksgiving day, hmmm?
Or are you just trying to derail the discussion away from the profligracy of the wealthy?
NOTIFY: Y | REPLY | REPLY WITH QUOTE | PERMALINK | TOP | HOME