Plastic bags, climate change, renewable energy,

Halo1

Likes Bikes and Dirt
From a individual moral perspective you need to
measure how much of a climate chunt you
have been. Establish your expectations and live by them going forward. I am so far off track myself so yeah I consider my self a climate chunt.
 

Minlak

custom titis
The amount people do and care is directly proportional to the amount of inconvenience they are prepared to put up with.
could you live without a TV? - could you live with out a car? - What about air con?
I find most people that preach about climate control to be massive hypocrites.
 

Oddjob

Merry fucking Xmas to you assholes
The amount people do and care is directly proportional to the amount of inconvenience they are prepared to put up with.
could you live without a TV? - could you live with out a car? - What about air con?
I find most people that preach about climate control to be massive hypocrites.
This is the beauty of carbon pricing. You don't have to make big sacrifices, just lots of little ones you barely notice.

Ultimately I'm still certain we are on a path to:
  1. Geo-engineering to buy time.
  2. Lots and lots of renewables supplemented by lots and lots of small scale nuclear.
  3. Excess energy from 2. used to run giant microwaves that turn CO2 into micro diamonds.
  4. Use micro diamonds to make highly reflective roads and roofing materials.


How do you pay for it? Holy shit there's this thing called carbon pricing...

Sent from my SM-G970F using Tapatalk
 

hifiandmtb

Sphincter beanie
I find most people that preach about climate control to be massive hypocrites.
I assume you mean "change" not control?

Presenting climate science results in hypocrisy? I try to discuss climate science on here, keeping it on the agenda.

As @Oddjob's stated, carbon pricing (especially the fee & dividend model) should be adopted everywhere immediately. At least the EU has had the ballz to do so:


I fear that acting with this model only at this point in time will be too late to address the issue meaningfully though. Science suggests we need to move to immediate rationing & a WW2-like reformation of society.

It's something we can & should tolerate. We are tolerating being locked in our homes for the last year!
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
I assume you mean "change" not control?

Presenting climate science results in hypocrisy? I try to discuss climate science on here, keeping it on the agenda.

As @Oddjob's stated, carbon pricing (especially the fee & dividend model) should be adopted everywhere immediately. At least the EU has had the ballz to do so:


I fear that acting with this model only at this point in time will be too late to address the issue meaningfully though. Science suggests we need to move to immediate rationing & a WW2-like reformation of society.

It's something we can & should tolerate. We are tolerating being locked in our homes for the last year!
We did that already. Apparently it was ruining the weekend or something. I’m still waiting for my $550 Tony….
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
It was not the same as that proposed in Hansen's presentation, there are major differences in the application.
It basically is, a national version of it at least.

The large producers of emissions were charged per tonne of co2-e, and the money raised went to low income people to offset their increased costs and it went to supporting emissions reductions - funding for ARENA for example.

It was remarkably effective at driving emissions reductions despite its short life and not having a chance to ramp up from its low introductory price. It was a net positive to the economy too.
 

hifiandmtb

Sphincter beanie
Hansen's version is different in many ways, these being two:

  1. Money collected stays out of the govt coffers, all goes to the citizens
  2. All citizens get the same payment

The govt can never be allowed to dip into the collection, and it can't be a tiered approach. Makes way more sense to me.
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
Hansen's version is different in many ways, these being two:

  1. Money collected stays out of the govt coffers, all goes to the citizens
  2. All citizens get the same payment

The govt can never be allowed to dip into the collection, and it can't be a tiered approach. Makes way more sense to me.
Sure. And will never ever happen. The reality based version is what we had - the economy and society benefits from the direct support and from the lowering of emissions.

Government coffers is the public money, at least mostly and in theory and when not corrupted… But the CPM was closer to the ideal than most. It was good, really good and we should be proud of it.
 

Haakon

has an accommodating arse
So proud. Look where Straya is now.


We get what we really want.

Don't blame the Scomo govt. Blame the shitstain citizens who put them there. And I don't even blame the citizens - the lifelong brainwashing is difficult to counter.
I agree. It was a great policy instrument, too good for the bogan morons who got sucked into the crap that led to its abolition… Such a wasted opportunity.
 

pink poodle

気が狂っている男
Top