Climate Change/Mass Extinction Megathread

[crazy canuck]

I think there will be a lot of things that people will notice.  Getting rid of international travel and consumer plastic items would be gigantic.  Of course, my experience would be significantly different from your own.  I'm not even sure that life in my area is practically possible in a low-carbon world.

Low carbon is not zero carbon.  There are options for Alberta.

I wonder.  There are certainly things that would be huge changes, like the inability to travel in the winter.

We're trying to reduce carbon output by 30-50%.  Which don't get me wrong will be hard!  But it's not impossible.

Here's the break-down of Alberta's greenhouse gas emissions.  https://www.alberta.ca/climate-change-alberta.aspx  Residential use is only 6%.  Oil sands produce 26%, electricity 18% and oil and gas mining 17%.

As we move to decrease oil and gas demand around the world our production will taper down as well, so we can potentially see big decreases in those numbers.  Then we really have to tackle electricity generation.  Again a combination of more renewables like wind and solar here in Alberta, and invest in increased production of hydro in BC and Manitoba should help a lot.

With more green electricity that then opens up lots of room for electric vehicles to reduce transportation.

Yeah, once site C comes on line that will help out Alberta quite a bit.

[Neil]

With more green electricity that then opens up lots of room for electric vehicles to reduce transportation.

I think the problem is that until they solve the cabin-heating problem, the transportation issue will be a problem.  I'm more hopeful for using wind, solar and the like to replace electrical generation sources, and perhaps even increase electrical heating for homes.

[alfred russel]

I think there will be a lot of things that people will notice.  Getting rid of international travel and consumer plastic items would be gigantic.  Of course, my experience would be significantly different from your own.  I'm not even sure that life in my area is practically possible in a low-carbon world.

Low carbon is not zero carbon.  There are options for Alberta.

This is just a symptom of the "there is a solution to problems that makes everyone happy" type of thinking that sounds great but is bullshit.

Canada is cold as fuck. Cold as fuck places generally require massive amounts of energy for enjoyable human life. Canada is an enlightened land and tries its best on climate stuff unlike the retrograde US that has a party convinced it is all a hoax. So Canada tries hard, but it can't overcome nature and the per capita carbon emissions in Canada exceed those in the US and are among the worst in the world.

Canada could acknowledge this and implement severely restrictive immigration policies and possibly even encourage out migration. Of course that isn't a policy in line with economic growth and in many cases social justice. But the trade offs are never acknowledged and we pretend that there is some goldilocks solution that is going to make everything okay.

[Eddie Teach]

Well, what are the alternatives? Fatalistic acceptance, pretending it doesn't exist, or moaning hopelessly.

[Jacob]

I think there will be a lot of things that people will notice.  Getting rid of international travel and consumer plastic items would be gigantic.  Of course, my experience would be significantly different from your own.  I'm not even sure that life in my area is practically possible in a low-carbon world.

Low carbon is not zero carbon.  There are options for Alberta.

This is just a symptom of the "there is a solution to problems that makes everyone happy" type of thinking that sounds great but is bullshit.

Canada is cold as fuck. Cold as fuck places generally require massive amounts of energy for enjoyable human life. Canada is an enlightened land and tries its best on climate stuff unlike the retrograde US that has a party convinced it is all a hoax. So Canada tries hard, but it can't overcome nature and the per capita carbon emissions in Canada exceed those in the US and are among the worst in the world.

Canada could acknowledge this and implement severely restrictive immigration policies and possibly even encourage out migration. Of course that isn't a policy in line with economic growth and in many cases social justice. But the trade offs are never acknowledged and we pretend that there is some goldilocks solution that is going to make everything okay.

Current numbers has Canada emitting 15.5 tons per capita compared to the US' 15.2. If everyone in Canada moved to the US, it wouldn't really move the needle much either.

[crazy canuck]

I think there will be a lot of things that people will notice.  Getting rid of international travel and consumer plastic items would be gigantic.  Of course, my experience would be significantly different from your own.  I'm not even sure that life in my area is practically possible in a low-carbon world.

Low carbon is not zero carbon.  There are options for Alberta.

This is just a symptom of the "there is a solution to problems that makes everyone happy" type of thinking that sounds great but is bullshit.

Canada is cold as fuck. Cold as fuck places generally require massive amounts of energy for enjoyable human life. Canada is an enlightened land and tries its best on climate stuff unlike the retrograde US that has a party convinced it is all a hoax. So Canada tries hard, but it can't overcome nature and the per capita carbon emissions in Canada exceed those in the US and are among the worst in the world.

Canada could acknowledge this and implement severely restrictive immigration policies and possibly even encourage out migration. Of course that isn't a policy in line with economic growth and in many cases social justice. But the trade offs are never acknowledged and we pretend that there is some goldilocks solution that is going to make everything okay.

Fun fact. BC and Quebec are entirely energy self sufficient and green - Hydro.

Another fun fact, when BC's newest hydro project comes online it will be able to supply all of Alberta's electrical needs.

Another fun fact, if the energy grid and sufficient battery storage is developed, those two provinces could supply the whole country with its electrical needs.

And next time it gets "cold as fuck" in a US city - check out the temperature in Vancouver or Victoria.   


What we really need to do is bring in far more immigrants because really - we are the hope for the world.   

[Barrister]

This is just a symptom of the "there is a solution to problems that makes everyone happy" type of thinking that sounds great but is bullshit.

Canada is cold as fuck. Cold as fuck places generally require massive amounts of energy for enjoyable human life. Canada is an enlightened land and tries its best on climate stuff unlike the retrograde US that has a party convinced it is all a hoax. So Canada tries hard, but it can't overcome nature and the per capita carbon emissions in Canada exceed those in the US and are among the worst in the world.

Canada could acknowledge this and implement severely restrictive immigration policies and possibly even encourage out migration. Of course that isn't a policy in line with economic growth and in many cases social justice. But the trade offs are never acknowledged and we pretend that there is some goldilocks solution that is going to make everything okay.

There is not some goldilocks solution that makes everyone happy.

Maybe you missed the point where if declining world oil demand will in turn help Alberta reduce our greenhouse gas emissions from oil production (which are massive).  That will have the unhappy effect of throwing hundreds of thousands of Albertans out of excellent high-paying jobs.

It's going to happen eventually - I'm just opposed to some pollyanna-ish bullshit of "keep it in the ground and the world will magically not turn to alternative sources of oil".  Reduce demand, not supply.

Canada has not really tried very hard at all.  We've talked a good game and done little to nothing or 30 years.

Home heating is really a tiny part of our overall greenhouse gas emissions.  We can do better but that's not where our problem lies.

[Tamas]

Not promising for Tyr and Sheilbh's plans of banning cars.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2021/sep/16/pollution-on-some-new-uk-trains-13-times-one-of-londons-busiest-roads

[Zanza]

That's only an argument to electrify those rail stretches that currently are not. Or run the train on hydrogen.

[alfred russel]

I think there will be a lot of things that people will notice.  Getting rid of international travel and consumer plastic items would be gigantic.  Of course, my experience would be significantly different from your own.  I'm not even sure that life in my area is practically possible in a low-carbon world.

Low carbon is not zero carbon.  There are options for Alberta.

This is just a symptom of the "there is a solution to problems that makes everyone happy" type of thinking that sounds great but is bullshit.

Canada is cold as fuck. Cold as fuck places generally require massive amounts of energy for enjoyable human life. Canada is an enlightened land and tries its best on climate stuff unlike the retrograde US that has a party convinced it is all a hoax. So Canada tries hard, but it can't overcome nature and the per capita carbon emissions in Canada exceed those in the US and are among the worst in the world.

Canada could acknowledge this and implement severely restrictive immigration policies and possibly even encourage out migration. Of course that isn't a policy in line with economic growth and in many cases social justice. But the trade offs are never acknowledged and we pretend that there is some goldilocks solution that is going to make everything okay.

Current numbers has Canada emitting 15.5 tons per capita compared to the US' 15.2. If everyone in Canada moved to the US, it wouldn't really move the needle much either.

You are comparing Canada to one of the worst emitters? The world is under 5 and Europe is about 7.5.

[The Brain]

Sweden has around 4 depending on who you ask, and has a roughly similar climate to Canada.

[alfred russel]

Well, what are the alternatives? Fatalistic acceptance, pretending it doesn't exist, or moaning hopelessly.

those are the approaches we take to much more serious problems: death, the inevitable demise of the planet, and ultimately demise of the universe.

[Jacob]

You are comparing Canada to one of the worst emitters? The world is under 5 and Europe is about 7.5.

Are you proposing that everyone should leave the US as well, then?

[alfred russel]

You are comparing Canada to one of the worst emitters? The world is under 5 and Europe is about 7.5.

Are you proposing that everyone should leave the US as well, then?

I'm not. I'm also not proposing that everyone leave Canada, or Canada curtail immigration.

I'm pointing out that the standard political approach is going to be ineffective: identifying a series of problems, and in isolation coming up with pithy strategies to deal with each that will appeal to middle brow dilettantes such as ourselves. Though maybe self satisfying and electorally successful.

There are so many downstream effects to any number of policies when it comes to climate change that if you actually want to prioritize it, it needs to be in every policy decision. And Canada alone is just a smart of a global topic.

[Tonitrus]

Fun fact. BC and Quebec are entirely energy self sufficient and green - Hydro.

I know there are a lot of pluses of hydroelectric power over fossil fuel extraction, but to call building a gigantic hydroelectric dam on a major (or any size, really) river system "entirely green" is quite a stretch.