one way, or the other, there is going to be peak "everything" - peak uranium, peak coal, peak gas etc. who cares - the best thing that people can do, is not to be worried about the issue. sure - people should be encouraged to walk, ride the bike, ride scooters etc (maybe the largest car, should be a 4 cyl) - but people should not feel guilty, about going on an "around australia tour" or to go overseas for holidays.
recently, world gas reserves, have "exploded" - eg - coal seam gas, gas from shales etc - indeed, the gas reserves of the united states are now, probably higher than what they have ever been (well - at least for 45 years, since some agency was keeping track of reserves).
when everything runs out, the feelings of a person, living in a cave, in 2000 years time (after peak "everything", is the same as a person, living in a cave today (which is what the greenies want).
countries with high carbon emissions (per capita), are countries with low birth rates... and these are the countries that have benefited greatly from the use of fossil fuels.. the moral of the story, is that countries who are developing, should be allowed to use as much fossil fuel, as possible - just to drag the country out of a quagmire - and with increasing affluence, then the population growth will decrease (indeed, for a lot of western countries, there would be negative population growth - except for migration from the third world).
the sooner that developing countries get out of poverty, the sooner that there will be population equilibrium, and the longer it will before "peak everything",, anyway, who cares, we can, in the end, grow trees, build sailing boats (and still go on holidays) - and burn tallow for lighting.
we can all see how rudd viewed the greatest moral challenge of out time - it was so important he would have gone for a double dissolution - but he chickened out - gillard had some influence over that issue - then gillard went to the election, claiming that there would be no carbon tax - but when confronted with having to deal with the greens, then a carbon tax was the way to go. one wonders what rudd, did, to reduce his carbon footprint (and forget the hair brained schemes of expensive solar panels)
there are only two scientists in the australian -parliament - jenzen and fielding. rudd probably only ran with climate change, because at the time, people had been fooled - eg gore and the ipcc, had won a nobel prize - and the masses were ignorant fools... as soon as public opinion started to go the other way - then rudd was happy to let the issue go by.
most of the ruling politburo (or whatever they call it in china) - are engineers - they are probably a bit brighter than most of our pollies - yet they are building new coal powered stations, at a rapid rate of knots .
this is what saving the world is all about.. - it is all about keeping poor people impoverished - years ago, watso read a report, where a indian farmer could trade carbon credits, if he got on a treadmill, and used muscle power, instead of using diesel.. watso did not look to hard - but came up with the following
To cancel out the CO2 of a return flight to India, it will take one poor villager three years of pumping water by foot. So is carbon offsetting the best way to ease your conscience?
This image of an Indian farmer on a treadmill is taken from the JP Morgan Climatecare website. You have dig down to find it but it's there.You won't find it on their front page that's for sure
yeah - jp morgan, feeling good, that they can trade in the carbon market, so that some poor indian farmer can do his bit, by using a treadmill as pump. mr morgan, and his wife, are probably fat slobs - who simply do not care about energy usage.
the reality, is that india and china are not interested in anything, that will restrict their development - and good on them
mmmm there might be peak "everything" - but one thing for certain, is that there will not be "peak carbon".
if carbon levels double, that is not going to be a tipping point.. anyway, the mwp, had temperatures, which were a lot higher than today - and man survived. it probably made europe a pleasant place to live - and there were probably fewer arabs, wandering around the water holes in the dessert ..
what was the scare a few years ago - it was all about the artic ice - it was supposed to be decreasing at an alarming rate - yeah yeah - it is now back to normal -... antartic ice is growing - and where the vikings used to live, in greenland - well, the settlements are still under thick layers of ice.
