Anybody who follows the real climate news, or this blog (and a few others) will quickly realize that most climate news sources are still being incredibly dishonest about the emergency that now exists.
Inside Climate News has created a video on Youtube that does exactly this (if you can view this here, your browser has to be allowed to accept cookies, it’s Youtube requirement, not mine):
The incredible dishonesty here is worth mentioning – and probably why they don’t allow comments. First off, we’re in a time when there is zero support for climate action in the world’s most polluting country (per capita) – the United States.
The video claims that we need to get our carbon footprint down to zero – and stabilize the climate. This is not true. It’s never been true. Here’s why:
Zero emissions are not possible.
a) all sources of energy creation come from fossil fuel. There is no such thing as clean energy.
b) agriculture (growing food) is a carbon-intensive activity. We’re not going to stop trying to grow food.
c) 550 Gigatons of carbon need to be removed from the environment. THAT is what is causing the current and FUTURE temperature increases, increased atmospheric moisture, ice melt, salinity changes, permafrost melt and methane releases, ocean acidification, and virtually everything else climate wise. Even with an imagined “zero emissions” world, past emissions guarantees a dramatically warming planet.
d) the claim that “emissions need to peak in 2020” and reach “zero” by 2040 is a factually impossible timeline. Never going to happen. Pure wishful thinking while ignoring past emissions.
“Don’t write off the optimist” is apparently the new euphemism for “liars”. People who can’t tell the truth or identify the truth. Asking us to support such people is ridiculous. I want to be optimistic too – but I’m also a realist on their claims. We absolutely must do everything we can, but we must also admit to what is true and what isn’t.
There are other points raised in the video – some which are accurate, most which aren’t. Yes, we’ll lose all the coral reefs with just another half degree warming, but we’ll not be able to stop warming before then, or even after that (remember that 550 Gigatons).
And no, electric vehicles are not about to “dethrone” the internal combustion engine. Not yet, and not for a long time yet. Just go look at the real stats to see this truth, how many electric vehicles are being built, how many are in use, compared to all the trucks and cars using combustion. There’s been an increase in electric vehicles, but it’s nothing worth claiming as title to the throne, not even close.
And how can companies factually commit to creating zero emissions? Are they planning on going out of business? How will Maersk shipping do this? Wind sails? This is the three-card Monty scam, where “offsets” to carbon emissions (using horribly polluting bunker fuel) will be (allegedly) offset with a carbon “credit” or a tree planted somewhere. This is not – and never will be – zero emissions. It’s a mathematical ploy designed to permit polluting industries to continue to burn fossil fuels.
There may be “no time left for climate denial“, but there is also no time left for climate dishonesty. This is the kind of phony hopium that should never be embraced, because here’s what will happen: none of these goals, claims, targets will be met. This will disillusion both proponents and observers, industry and business, government and NGO’s who will all belatedly realize that they were lied to and probably should have tried something else. This is of course, assuming that they’ve managed to break through their own bubbles and self-deceptions, which may not happen.
Irregardless of that, the time which will be wasted pretending we’ve got “the solution” by following this particular path will be gone. And the time that humanity needs to actually get serious about future survival and a habitable planet will be lost. It’s well known that we do not have any time to waste.
Yes, we absolutely need real zero emissions, but none of these claims are real zero emissions. Not one. These proposal continue the growth paradigm, energy consumption, resource exploitation, and even land use that created this problem. In other words – it is not a real sincere effort to re-engineer civilization (which is what is REALLY needed and what I have always advocated).
These proposal intend to perpetuate our current civilization, growth, dominance of the habitable biosphere and land use changes. This will never work, because it all requires fossil fuel, we cannot capture the carbon emitted, we cannot remove past carbon emissions yet, nor can continue to grow or even continue to sustain this current civilization (in its present form) without guaranteeing total collapse. We need to find pathways to LESS of everything.
There are still vast resources in the world to exploit. Which will be done, because we haven’t changed one bit. The “green future” envisioned changes nothing about human predatory expansion and destruction, which is deeply embedded into our civilization. Now it is powered by fossil fuels and always will be, even if we pretend to “alternatively” power ourselves with something else. It’s just self-deception. And we’ll go right on building, growing, expanding and polluting, destroying more of the biosphere in our quest to have it all. Whatever we can imagine. And we’ll fight to get there. There’s no LESS in any of this. And it’s not green – it’s growth.
This is not the answer and never will be. It’s more of the “we’ll finally dominate it all” techno-utopia attitude that created the planetary emergency we now have. Inside Climate News should know all this, but for whatever reason, they’re too cowardly to say it. I’m not beholden to anybody or any interest other then my own and the future survival of my own family. I know they’re lying to us, everybody is. And I know that their “answer” is totally bogus. We cannot keep doing the same things that caused this problem.
But we will. And because of that – you know what will happen if you’ve read much of this blog.