Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community

Go Back   Calgarypuck Forums - The Unofficial Calgary Flames Fan Community > Main Forums > The Off Topic Forum

View Poll Results: What role do humans play in contributing to climate change?
Humans are the primary contributor to climate change 396 62.86%
Humans contribute to climate change, but not the main cause 165 26.19%
Not sure 37 5.87%
Climate change is a hoax 32 5.08%
Voters: 630. You may not vote on this poll

Reply
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
Old 09-26-2019, 07:06 PM   #1141
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
Your point is clouded. Your point was that kids shouldn't be speaking out. They are allowed to speak out on whatever they choose.

Whether you believe they are experts in their own domain is another story, and you seem strong-willed on not believing young people because they haven't gone through life scenarios yet that adults have. And presumably you are referring to the larger pool of responsibilities side and the economics associated with that.

You are assuming they can't make coherent or informed points without walking a mile in adult's shoes. I just flat out disagree.

One can get educated/knowledgeable about a certain subject, no matter what age they are at. There are plenty of under-18 SME's on a variety of topics - motivated, learned, and have the aptitude to specialize in their domains.

One more thing - you'd be surprised just how many kids in this world actually have to work / perform labor to support their families. Don't just think about this from a Western context.
As I said earlier, they have the right to free speech.

I don't think even you would call them experts in any domain.

Sadly, because the media is playing them up we tend to focus on their whining. And when someone like Bill Gates says we should develop nuclear technology everyone rolls their eyes and says NIMBY.

That to me is the crux of the problem.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 3 Users Say Thank You to Azure For This Useful Post:
Old 09-26-2019, 07:36 PM   #1142
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

To each their own. It would be dangerous to dismiss "kids" though even if it was a message that many, many, many, adults also agree is an issue.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 07:41 PM   #1143
jayswin
Celebrated Square Root Day
 
jayswin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

He didn't say dismiss he said criticize. It is of the upmost importance to criticize every position taken on political issues. And this is a political issue unless any single country is okay submarining themselves and their citizens into despair in honour of the environment.

It's unfortunate, but it's reality.
jayswin is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to jayswin For This Useful Post:
Old 09-26-2019, 07:45 PM   #1144
jayswin
Celebrated Square Root Day
 
jayswin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Exp:
Default

It really is a crappy situation. We're at situation critical in terms of climate change but we also need two things

1. An alternative that is real and ready to start replacing oil at a cost effective and sustainable level, and

2. Something that keeps countries afloat economically so they don't fall off a cliff and devolve into mass unemployment and economic ruin.

World speakers on climate change acting like these things don't exist or boldly stating that they can't matter because we have to change are just ignoring reality. And I highly, highly doubt they'd be comfortable living in the aftermath of any country that has either a lack of sustainable energy or an economic collapse because "we just have to stop right now!!!".

Last edited by jayswin; 09-26-2019 at 07:48 PM.
jayswin is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 07:52 PM   #1145
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

There is also NO evidence at all to say that increasing our oil infrastructure would in anyway be tied into increased global warming, natural disasters, pollution or a slew of other environmental issues. None.

There is also no evidence to suggest that Canada can do anything internally as a country to stop what is happening.

In fact, I would say Canada, and the way we produce oil and handle our environmental issues is part of the solution. Why? Because I think the solution to carbon emissions from fossil fuels is not to stop using them, but to use them cleaner. And as I have pointed out in this thread and as many companies have proven, it IS possible to run a natural gas plant without any emissions, and it is possible to highly reduce emissions from oil production.

The kicker in all that is that Canada & the US are the only countries where this is possible. So what we SHOULD be doing is figuring all that out and then exporting that technology so it can be used on a global scale.

Instead, by trying to shut down our oil economy or thinking we can make a difference by doing so we are literally crippling any chance of figuring any of that out. Most of the world is going to continue using coal and other dirty fossil fuels. North America is literally the only hope we have in getting rid of coal and helping companies produce cleaner.

Literally the only hope.

And yet we are hellbent on stopping even that potential.

Also, because I believe all that, I think the anti-fossil fuel industry in North America are increasing the risk of global warming. THEY are part of the problem. Not the solution. Every idiot protesting the Transcanada Pipeline is speeding up climate change. They are not making a positive difference at all.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 07:54 PM   #1146
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin View Post
It really is a crappy situation. We're at situation critical in terms of climate change but we also need two things

1. An alternative that is real and ready to start replacing oil at a cost effective and sustainable level, and

2. Something that keeps countries afloat economically so they don't fall off a cliff and devolve into mass unemployment and economic ruin.

World speakers on climate change acting like these things don't exist or boldly stating that they can't matter because we have to change are just ignoring reality. And I highly, highly doubt they'd be comfortable living in the aftermath of any country that has either a lack of sustainable energy or an economic collapse because "we just have to stop right now!!!".
World speakers on climate change fly around in their private jets and generally have a bigger carbon footprint than most other people.

They are EXACTLY the people we should NOT listen too.

IMO.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 07:56 PM   #1147
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by jayswin View Post
He didn't say dismiss he said criticize. It is of the upmost importance to criticize every position taken on political issues. And this is a political issue unless any single country is okay submarining themselves and their citizens into despair in honour of the environment.

It's unfortunate, but it's reality.
Azure did not once use the word 'criticize' in the last four pages. His point is very dismissive of people without enough "life" experience, and is lamenting the media focus on someone who is whining.

Some of you are focusing too much on the spokesperson, the rally point, the galvanizer. While Thunberg may not be the scientist you are chiding her for (not to mention her speech delivery style that makes people uncomfortable), I am sure it is not hard to see that she represents a perspective on climate change that is not dismissive and should be addressed.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 08:01 PM   #1148
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
Azure did not once use the word 'criticize' in the last four pages. His point is very dismissive of people without enough "life" experience, and is lamenting the media focus on someone who is whining.

Some of you are focusing too much on the spokesperson, the rally point, the galvanizer. While Thunberg may not be the scientist you are chiding her for (not to mention her speech delivery style that makes people uncomfortable), I am sure it is not hard to see that she represents a perspective on climate change that is not dismissive and should be addressed.
I would say I am very critical of her perspective. Is that not criticizing her? You can call it dismissive if you want, but I have said she has the right to say what she wants.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 08:41 PM   #1149
DiracSpike
First Line Centre
 
DiracSpike's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Location: BELTLINE
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
Azure did not once use the word 'criticize' in the last four pages. His point is very dismissive of people without enough "life" experience, and is lamenting the media focus on someone who is whining.

Some of you are focusing too much on the spokesperson, the rally point, the galvanizer. While Thunberg may not be the scientist you are chiding her for (not to mention her speech delivery style that makes people uncomfortable), I am sure it is not hard to see that she represents a perspective on climate change that is not dismissive and should be addressed.
What perspective is that? How should it be addressed? Are you suggesting that people are not fighting climate change now? Is over the top hysteria and thrashing around in vain and ultimately ineffective and damaging policies going to make the situation better?

Azure gave a bunch of good examples but here’s another one. As it stands right now the TMX stands to displace 600,000 barrels of heavy oil from other countries produced above the carbon intensity of an Alberta’s barrel. If completed indigenous groups will own an equity stake. The profts to oil companies allow them to target getting to net zero emissions and the profits to government are funding green technologies which need capital more than anything else. If we don’t capture this market share that money doing environmental good will instead be funding god knows what in Iran and Venezuela. I challenge you to argue that building the pipeline is less environmental than not, right away it’s a clear win and that’s before considering economic or geopolitical advantages. This arrangement is the most perfect implementation of policy I’ve ever seen in my life, it’s a win win win. So what’s the reaction of the group you say we should look to, to respect their views as the pure voice of children? The group Youth climate strikers was blocked by Catharine McKennas twitter today for telling her to STFU and blasting her for buying a pipeline. I’m sure we’ll probably hear Greta come out against the pipeline tomorrow in Montreal. They don’t see the whole issue, they don’t see the macro view, they think pipeline = bad, oil companies = bad. Simplistic, morally unambiguous, and ultimately damaging and counter productive. Childish.

Last edited by DiracSpike; 09-26-2019 at 08:43 PM.
DiracSpike is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 08:53 PM   #1150
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

I honestly don't care about pipelines getting built. If it makes sense do it, if it doesn't then don't. It contributes may 1% of Canada's greenhouse gas emissions, so there is much improvement to be made in many other areas.

Thunberg can lambast Canadian pipelines all day long. She'll have her supporters and she'll have her detractors, just like every other anti and pro-pipeline person out there with a microphone. They will still get built because there is a market for it. I don't care if she's mad at Canada for it. Big whoop.

One thing you may notice is that she intentionally avoids recommending specific policies. She even said " “I can’t really speak up about things like [politics] .... no one would take me seriously.” She defers quite often for politicians to instead listen to scientists with data to support. In recent cases, she has deferred to the huge report released by the IPCC. She did this in lieu of testifying to the U.S. House.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 09:40 PM   #1151
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

If you follow the history of the oil industry and how the technology has been developed it becomes pretty clear that first of all oil / gas isn't going anywhere, and also because it isn't going anywhere the only hope of producing it and using it in a cleaner way is North America.

We are the ONLY place on earth that has the potential to reduce the emissions on an impactful scale. And the only way to do that is to INCREASE funding, increase production and simply create a mandate to meet emissions targets. Because we have the brightest minds in the industry, we can meet those targets and export our technology.

And at the end of the day that is the only hope we have. Exporting our technology to cut back on emissions, pollution and environmental damage around the world.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 10:03 PM   #1152
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Azure View Post
We are the ONLY place on earth that has the potential to reduce the emissions on an impactful scale.
Can you explain this in more depth? On one hand we have this statement, but on the other there are people in this thread that don't see how Canada should practically bother with carbon emissions reduction because there are larger countries that pollute far worse than we do.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-26-2019, 10:31 PM   #1153
you&me
First Line Centre
 
Join Date: Nov 2017
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
Can you explain this in more depth? On one hand we have this statement, but on the other there are people in this thread that don't see how Canada should practically bother with carbon emissions reduction because there are larger countries that pollute far worse than we do.
I don't want to speak for Azure, but my thought -

A dollar spent on Canadian oil has a greater chance of being used to fund developments like lower emission production, or clean tech R&D (i.e. carbon capture) or having tax revenue directed towards green initiatives than a dollar spent on, say, Saudi or Venezuelan oil.
you&me is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 2 Users Say Thank You to you&me For This Useful Post:
Old 09-27-2019, 09:33 AM   #1154
transplant99
Fearmongerer
 
transplant99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Wondering when # became hashtag and not a number sign.
Exp:
Default

Opinion piece in the G&M...pretty level headed at that, as the hysteria is getting in the way of real discussion.

Quote:
We don’t emit CO2 with malign intent. Indeed, it is a byproduct of giving humanity access to unprecedented amounts of energy.

Just a century ago, life was back-breaking. Plentiful energy made better lives possible, without having to spend hours collecting firewood, polluting your household with smoke, achieving heat, cold, transportation, light, food and opportunities. Life expectancy doubled. Plentiful energy, mostly from fossil fuels, has lifted more than a billion people out of poverty in just the past 25 years.

That is not evil – it is quite the opposite.

Ms. Thunberg believes that climate change means people are dying, but the fact is that weather-related disasters just a century ago killed half a million people each year. Today, despite rising temperatures but because of less poverty and more resilience, droughts, floods, hurricanes and extreme temperatures kill just 20,000 people each year – a reduction of 95 per cent. That is a morally commendable achievement.
https://www.theglobeandmail.com/opin...y-is-not-evil/
__________________
Quote:
The Jets aren’t winning anything. They have no #1C or D.

They hardly look like any contender.
transplant99 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2019, 11:32 AM   #1155
TheIronMaiden
Franchise Player
 
TheIronMaiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATCO Field, Section 201
Exp:
Default

A remarkable turnout in St. Johns.


https://twitter.com/user/status/1177586780331220992
TheIronMaiden is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following User Says Thank You to TheIronMaiden For This Useful Post:
Old 09-27-2019, 11:33 AM   #1156
TheIronMaiden
Franchise Player
 
TheIronMaiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATCO Field, Section 201
Exp:
Default

and in Halifax

https://twitter.com/user/status/1177596306728128513
TheIronMaiden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2019, 11:39 AM   #1157
Ozy_Flame

Posted the 6 millionth post!
 
Ozy_Flame's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Exp:
Default

I think there were a number of cities today around Canada and the world doing the Climate Strike. Many major European cities, as well as in Asia, Africa and the South Pacific. I believe there is one in Edmonton tonight too (not sure about Calgary).

I was in Italy this summer where it was reaching almost 40 degrees during their heatwave in early July. I believe they had to go through that multiple times this summer (France got to 46 at one point). Couldn't imagine marching around those urban jungles if it was that hot for more than 5 minutes. Thankfully we aren't getting that level of heat!

Last edited by Ozy_Flame; 09-27-2019 at 11:41 AM.
Ozy_Flame is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2019, 11:40 AM   #1158
Azure
Had an idea!
 
Azure's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2005
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
Can you explain this in more depth? On one hand we have this statement, but on the other there are people in this thread that don't see how Canada should practically bother with carbon emissions reduction because there are larger countries that pollute far worse than we do.
Quote:
Originally Posted by you&me View Post
I don't want to speak for Azure, but my thought -

A dollar spent on Canadian oil has a greater chance of being used to fund developments like lower emission production, or clean tech R&D (i.e. carbon capture) or having tax revenue directed towards green initiatives than a dollar spent on, say, Saudi or Venezuelan oil.
Good answer and exactly my point.

Canada & the US are also at the cutting edge of carbon capture, and are the ONLY hope of that technology being developed. China, Russia, India, these countries don't really care. China especially is spending a lot of money on renewables, but they are also building a lot of coal plants.

In the US & Canada, coal is being phased out despite what Trump is saying. And that is happening because we have abundant natural gas, the technology to burn it cleaner and great infrastructure to move it.

Everyday that a single pipeline in North America is delayed is another day that 'dirty oil' is gaining more market share, and another day we are losing in the time battle of reducing our emissions.

That is what I mean with limited perspective. The anti pipeline idiots think they are 'helping' the cause by not letting Canada build pipelines, but their perspective is extremely limited. And because of that they truly ARE the reason we can't accomplish anything, and are MORE at fault than any North American based oil & gas company.
Azure is offline   Reply With Quote
The Following 4 Users Say Thank You to Azure For This Useful Post:
Old 09-27-2019, 11:46 AM   #1159
TheIronMaiden
Franchise Player
 
TheIronMaiden's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: ATCO Field, Section 201
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ozy_Flame View Post
I think there were a number of cities today around Canada and the world doing the Climate Strike. Many major European cities, as well as in Asia, Africa and the South Pacific. I believe there is one in Edmonton tonight too (not sure about Calgary).

I was in Italy this summer where it was reaching almost 40 degrees during their heatwave in early July. I believe they had to go through that multiple times this summer (France got to 46 at one point). Couldn't imagine marching around those urban jungles if it was that hot for more than 5 minutes. Thankfully we aren't getting that level of heat!
I think that Edmonton and Calgary are doing it at 1PM
TheIronMaiden is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-27-2019, 11:49 AM   #1160
Wormius
Franchise Player
 
Wormius's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Somewhere down the crazy river.
Exp:
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by TheIronMaiden View Post
I think that Edmonton and Calgary are doing it at 1PM

1PM? That would be interesting. My son's school sent out an email saying that they could walk out of class if they wanted, but would be marked absent. Friday's are half-days though, so, that might be pretty awkward if it's planned for after school.
Wormius is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:05 AM.

Calgary Flames
2024-25




Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright Calgarypuck 2021