Climate what’s the story

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

I was listening to an oxford university debate/forum. And one of the interesting points that were brought out by one of the speakers is this why many of you have no children he had just had a young child. And he was thinking about this thing with climate, and how things affect everything, and what we are telling people in poor countries. The messages is you have to be able to live in poverty because we in the west know better and cheap abundant petrochemicals are bad. So then he said picture this you live in a poor country. You just had a beautiful, baby boy or girl and the powers that be come to you and say, you see that red button over there if you push that red button for every day of your child’s life, they will live in prosperity. They will be healthy and they will never want for anything. But every time you push that button you will release 1 ton of carbon into the air, here is the truth. There is not a parent alive, who would not beat that button until their hands were bloody to save their children. No matter what you think about climate change, no matter how you feel, you are not going to stop people and countries trying to move themselves out of poverty. what’s your thoughts.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Oh it's like the pink button on your armchair, mashing on it to pop up another Bud Light.

Blather on

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Lmao

Well thank you

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

You're so lost, I was laughing at myself! lmao

Go go go thank you……lmao

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

You sure did blather in that load of excrement post! By the way when "Gawd" gave man dominion of the earth he's the one that told the children where the cobalt is.

My own troll……..so much fun…….lmao keep right on going………

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Which bus are you driving today?

Well thank you…….

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Go Kamala go!

Thank you

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

-lease keep going your fun to watch….really lmao

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

You taught well. Have a Bud Light with the children. Putting cobalt into beer gives you better head.

Go go go

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

You're material is already running thin.... you better dream up another life.

Thank you

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

So you are getting what you give.

Thank you

as I said you are fun to watch……..lmao go go go.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

On another note, just picked up a new Colt 45 manufactured by Sears . An amazing find in a local shop.

 

[spARTacus]

I was listening to ... what’s your thoughts.

It's an awkward analogy/scenario, how the guy presented it or how you represented it, but it's exactly why the US didn't want to sign on to some of the earlier global agreements (maybe it is the early Paris one I am thinking of), because there wasn't going to be high enough assurances for the US that some of the really bad contributors (eg. China, India, Russia, developing world...) would also comply and then the US lose competitive/economic advantage. It's a catch22. If not enough sign on, those that do potentially risk something. If enough do sign on, everyone moves forward equally disadvantaged, for the purpose of overall greater benefits. This is where global leadership comes in, helping to create momentum for critical mass and signing on so others aren't afraid to also sign on (and it's easier for those that don't have to risk losing as much, to jump in). The cons for the developing world aspect I think they eventually tried to deal with (no idea if they moved forward with it) as part of a schema for basically transfer payments, which I think was envisioned to potentially also eventually help achieve more balance and equalization of wealth.That is what lots of this comes down to. The urge to retain and not upset current entitlement, position, luxury, power, control, standard of living, and at the expense of others and at the expense of greater good.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

It's an awkward analogy/scenario, how the guy presented it or how you represented it, but it's exactly why the US didn't want to sign on to some of the earlier global agreements (maybe it is the early Paris one I am thinking of), because there wasn't going to be high enough assurances for the US that some of the really bad contributors (eg. China, India, Russia, developing world...) would also comply and then the US lose competitive/economic advantage. It's a catch22. If not enough sign on, those that do potentially risk something. If enough do sign on, everyone moves forward equally disadvantaged, for the purpose of overall greater benefits. This is where global leadership comes in, helping to create momentum for critical mass and signing on so others aren't afraid to also sign on (and it's easier for those that don't have to risk losing as much, to jump in). The cons for the developing world aspect I think they eventually tried to deal with (no idea if they moved forward with it) as part of a schema for basically transfer payments, which I think was envisioned to potentially also eventually help achieve more balance and equalization of wealth.That is what lots of this comes down to. The urge to retain and not upset current entitlement, position, luxury, power, control, standard of living, and at the expense of others and at the expense of greater good.

Yes and no, people want to move from poverty this is the basis of environmental racism. Rich folks telling poor ones sorry your late to the game. In China they are. Building I believe 65gw of coal fired generation. The west needs to be smart about this wind and solar do no good. In order to keep the grid stable oil/gas/coal plants need to be on standby to cover all the green energy. If not the grid will collapse.

 

[spARTacus]

...people want to move from poverty this is the basis of environmental racism. Rich folks telling poor ones sorry your late to the game...

Environmental racism doesn't seem like a great label for it. Maybe "era disadvantaged" or something like that, would be more applicable. But yes indeed, if stifling the ability of poorer and developing nations to come out of poverty is resulting from of how the world is moving away from fossil fuels, then the way in which the world is moving away from fossil fuels needs to be additionally adjusted. This is all still a moving target. Nothing about the transformation is going to be perfect, certainly not initially, and there will also be lots of pain and further changes along the way.

 

[spARTacus]

....In China they are. Building I believe 65gw of coal fired generation....

What China will or will not do, is a reason why there was so much US hesitation to jump onboard, because what China and what the US may or may not do, directly impacts the relativeness of positioning between them.

 

[spARTacus]

...The west needs to be smart about this wind and solar do no good. In order to keep the grid stable oil/gas/coal plants need to be on standby to cover all the green energy. If not the grid will collapse.

Lots of things aren't yet figured out. Some have suggested more efficient natural gas power generation approaches, as also for some interim measures.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Lots of things aren't yet figured out. Some have suggested more efficient natural gas power generation approaches, as also for some interim measures.

What we should do is oil for as long as it will last, cleaner and cleaner engines. Let’s not forget the 70s before and after the. Catalytic converter..

Environmental racism doesn't seem like a great label for it. Maybe "era disadvantaged" or something like that, would be more applicable. But yes indeed, if stifling the ability of poorer and developing nations to come out of poverty is resulting from of how the world is moving away from fossil fuels, then the way in which the world is moving away from fossil fuels needs to be additionally adjusted. This is all still a moving target. Nothing about the transformation is going to be perfect, certainly not initially, and there will also be lots of pain and further changes along the way.

I still stand by what I said, since I do business in many parts of the world. The only thing that will bring people out of poverty will be petrochemicals.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

What China will or will not do, is a reason why there was so much US hesitation to jump onboard, because what China and what the US may or may not do, directly impacts the relativeness of positioning between them.

While we cripple our economy they build theirs. I’m afraid this will not end well.

 

[SteinwayTransitCorp]

Lots of things aren't yet figured out. Some have suggested more efficient natural gas power generation approaches, as also for some interim measures.

Your right, and to up end a trillion dollar economy on a maybe is not a good idea.