Climate change and human responsibility

[BagoPucks]

I am sure a lot of you in this thread has done this but I will leave a Carbon Footprint Calculator here for you to play around and get an idea of where the CO2 footprint comes from. By no means is any calculator perfect. Great for getting ideas on how to bring the number lower.

https://www.carbonfootprint.com/calculator.aspx

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

I will just leave this here. We can only do so much. Doesnt mean don't do anything, but the point still stands.
(Sources of GHG Emissions)

No one thinks Canada fixing our emission issues will solve the world's problems. But if countries are going to pressure the US or China to fix things, they can't have high emmis themselves.

[chemgear]

What's the cost of having a kid. Or two or three?

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

I will just leave this here. We can only do so much. Doesnt mean don't do anything, but the point still stands.
(Sources of GHG Emissions)

Again, where did all the emissions to build all the goods you own take place?

The average person in China has a miniscule carbon footprint compared to the average Canadian or American.

We moved all the smokestacks to make all our crap outside our borders, and now conveniently point fingers.

[DevilsAdvocate]

This thread is 111 pages long, and it would seem that post #4 hit the nail on the head.

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...61&postcount=4


-=-=-=-=-=-=-

When Greta Thunberg was asked to speak to congress, Rep. Garret Graves questioned her. The gist of what he was asking in a roundabout way was, why should the United States do anything if China doesn't cut their emissions. Thunberg's response was along the lines of that in Sweden they ask why they should do anything if the U.S. doesn't cut their emissions. If everyone points to countries with higher emissions (and disengenuously ignoring population differences), it just becomes a finger pointing game and solves nothing.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

Again, where did all the emissions to build all the goods you own take place?

The average person in China has a miniscule carbon footprint compared to the average Canadian or American.

We moved all the smokestacks to make all our crap outside our borders, and now conveniently point fingers.

Whats the fix for that, sanctions on Chinese products?

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Whats the fix for that, sanctions on Chinese products?

Yes, have carbon price for all goods consumed within your boarders and no carbon price on goods exported. All emissions and pollution should be owned by the end user of the product and tarriffed by the country the product is used in. This way a country can truly be net neutral without destroying competitiveness or exporting pollution.

[Bill Bumface]

^Agreed. The free market system works great, except when it comes to pricing in side effects of producing goods.

If environmental and human impacts (worker's rights etc) could be priced into everything, the world would be pretty great.

[zamler]

Originally Posted by DevilsAdvocate

This thread is 111 pages long, and it would seem that post #4 hit the nail on the head.

https://forum.calgarypuck.com/showpo...61&postcount=4


-=-=-=-=-=-=-

When Greta Thunberg was asked to speak to congress, Rep. Garret Graves questioned her. The gist of what he was asking in a roundabout way was, why should the United States do anything if China doesn't cut their emissions. Thunberg's response was along the lines of that in Sweden they ask why they should do anything if the U.S. doesn't cut their emissions. If everyone points to countries with higher emissions (and disengenuously ignoring population differences), it just becomes a finger pointing game and solves nothing.

Greta has a massive carbon footprint compared to me and hangs out with people that have even bigger carbon footprints.

[Samonadreau]

Originally Posted by GGG

Yes, have carbon price for all goods consumed within your boarders and no carbon price on goods exported. All emissions and pollution should be owned by the end user of the product and tarriffed by the country the product is used in. This way a country can truly be net neutral without destroying competitiveness or exporting pollution.

Then what are they waiting for?

[DevilsAdvocate]

Originally Posted by zamler

Greta has a massive carbon footprint compared to me and hangs out with people that have even bigger carbon footprints.

Congratulations on ignoring the whole point of what I wrote and not addressing anything in the post. Well done.

The point was that an American politician suggested that the United States should not do anything until China does something.

Now do you want to try again or do you want to only address whom the American politician was talking to at the time?

Oi.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Then what are they waiting for?

More profit. Cheaper stuff.

[PeteMoss]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Then what are they waiting for?

US and EU have both recently proposed import tariffs based on carbon. Incentivize cleaner products from other markets.

https://www.reuters.com/business/sus...ts-2021-07-14/

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/artic...in-budget-deal

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

^Agreed. The free market system works great, except when it comes to pricing in side effects of producing goods.

If environmental and human impacts (worker's rights etc) could be priced into everything, the world would be pretty great.

Could you imagine how hard that would be? Take something as common as a cell phone. How were the precious metals mined? Did the country use poorly paid labour? Did they have proper environmental treatment through the process? Safety standards? What about the plastic bits? Did the oil come from Saudi Arabia, or Nigeria? Which is worse? How do you quantify that? Even factoring in the CO2 commissions for production would be incredibly difficult, considering all the different parts. Is the power used in production hydro, or coal? If it's hydro for 2/3rds of the year, and coal for the rest, does a September phone cost more than a March one? And do you tax it more in Ontario than Vancouver, if it has to travel further? What about disposal and recycling?

Sure, you could create average values for a specific item, like all phones have $80, but then you don't incentivize reducing externalities.

It's a great idea in theory. In practice, it would be a nightmare to attempt to quantify, track, and bill all externalities for everything we purchase.

[Bill Bumface]

Originally Posted by Fuzz

It's a great idea in theory. In practice, it would be a nightmare to attempt to quantify, track, and bill all externalities for everything we purchase.

I don't disagree, an in fact, even stated the free market is really bad at this

That's why regulations and standards come into play.

Even if you could track all of this (I've seen some neat applications of block chain in the food supply where every ingredient could be tracked back to it's source, great for tracking foodborne illness), it still relies on inspectors and other bribe-able positions.

I can't think of anything that works other than producing things in countries you trust. But then how do you let the rest of the world grow up into countries that can be trusted if they have no economic leverage?

[Fuzz]

Originally Posted by Bill Bumface

I don't disagree, an in fact, even stated the free market is really bad at this

That's why regulations and standards come into play.

Even if you could track all of this (I've seen some neat applications of block chain in the food supply where every ingredient could be tracked back to it's source, great for tracking foodborne illness), it still relies on inspectors and other bribe-able positions.

I can't think of anything that works other than producing things in countries you trust. But then how do you let the rest of the world grow up into countries that can be trusted if they have no economic leverage?

You could, perhaps, create a general rating system on countries based on a pool of conditions. So a China import gets a tariff of 27%, and an Italian one might be 18%, or whatever. But that would then be subject to politics, and would probably lead to massive trade wars and trading blocks of countries. And as you say, the less developed countries would be severely handicapped in this type of play. It's a really tough problem, if that's the way we want to go.

[TherapyforGlencross]

Originally Posted by Macman

Fossil fuels were here from the beginning so we're just utilizing what we have, how else are we going to survive as humans?

Yes we have to evolve and figure things out as we go but I don't see any real solutions from the climate change alarmists other than electric cars and solar energy which are good but so far still seem to be a bit impractical for the masses. How many people can afford a Tesla?

Maybe climate change is just natural evolution, the earth has been here roughly 6 billion years so of course we're going to get warmer than we've ever been.

Sunrise and sunsets, heat, solar flares, increased human population, it all adds up.

Yes it deserves attention but we'll survive and carry on, that much is certain.

Solar flares, volcanic eruptions, and other natural effects have been factored in the ICPP report, found in Section B. The ICPP has concluded that even in consideration of natural heat and cooling effects, humans are the dominant factor in the increase of global temperatures.

Climate change is a natural evolution of the world, you’re correct, look at the Pliocene for evidence. But humans are intensifying and quickening the effects of such change, one we are not adapting to quickly enough.

[GGG]

Originally Posted by Samonadreau

Then what are they waiting for?

No one actually cares about global warming enough to sacrifice standard of living. We are just waiting for technology to catch up and bail us out. It also needs to be the right kind of tech as nuclear or geo engineering don’t count.

[rubecube]

I think the COVID pandemic has pretty conclusively proven that we as a society can't be trusted to behave in a responsible manner that protects our collective interests and survival. There's going to need to be a major re-ordering of social and economic priorities/ideologies if we're to actually have any hope of getting out of this crisis.

[undercoverbrother]

Originally Posted by rubecube

I think the COVID pandemic has pretty conclusively proven that we as a society can't be trusted to behave in a responsible manner that protects our collective interests and survival. There's going to need to be a major re-ordering of social and economic priorities/ideologies if we're to actually have any hope of getting out of this crisis.

I demand my freedom to burn fossil fuels!