The Dreaded "E" Word or Good Intentions On the Road to Hell


 

Canada must stop producing fossil fuels by 2034. 12 more years if mankind is to have a break-even chance of arresting global warming at 1.5C.

A study out of the Tyndall Centre for Climate Change, University of Manchester, contends that rich countries must slash fossil energy production by 70 % by 2030 and entirely just four years later. Poor countries that may be heavily or almost totally dependent on fossil fuel revenues should be given until 2050 to end production.

The report examines each country’s wealth and how dependent its economy is on fossil fuel production. It found that many poorer countries would be crippled economically and politically by a rapid move away from oil and gas, while wealthier nations could afford to end fossil fuel production while remaining relatively prosperous.

The author, prof. Kevin Anderson, isn't optimistic.

Anderson warned many wealthier nations still only paid “lip service” to the idea. “I don’t see any sense of equity being taken seriously by the policymakers in the wealthy parts of the world,” he said.

"Equity", the dreaded "E" word. It is to the leaders of the rich countries as the noonday sun is to a vampire. There'll be no talk of equity or climate justice when the G20 leaders gather. No Thank You.  Merely discussing such ideas would be an admission of guilt.

Canada, at 5.1 million barrels a day ranks fourth in oil production, much of it diluted bitumen. We outproduce Iraq, the UAE, Iran, Kuwait, Norway, Qatar, Nigeria and Brazil. The US leads the pack with 16 million barrels a day. 

The obvious conclusion is that Justin Trudeau, with his inane Trans Mountain Pipeline diving deeper in the red every day, has no intention of stopping oil and bitumen production. None, zero.

Professor Anderson's solution sounds radical, almost crazy. It's not. It's not even novel. Back in 2015 when a freshly minted Canadian prime minister took to the floor of the Paris climate summit to declare 'Canada's back' there emerged a consensus that climate heating had to be kept below 1.5C if humanity was to have a chance of surviving. 

Also in attendance at the Paris meet was Hans Joachim (Johnny) Schellnhuber, head of the prestigious Potsdam Climate Centre. A reporter asked him if achieving the 1.5C target was possible. He said yes but it would require an "induced implosion" of the fossil fuel industry by the governments of the major producers. In essence, Schellenhuber was saying in 2015 much the same as what Anderson calls for today.

We need to accept that Canada's fossil energy policy is contributing to a desperate future for our young people. Around the world people will die in huge numbers. That's on us.

Comments

  1. Owen GrayMarch 23, 2022 at 10:32 AM

    That's something we refuse to come to terms with, Mound. It's on us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Disaffected LibMarch 23, 2022 at 11:38 AM

      The time factor may be the worst part of this, Owen. We, especially the wealthy nations, need to slash our GHG emissions by 50% by 2030 and be carbon neutral by 2050. The federal government, by contrast, is shooting for 30% by 2030 and isn't on track to meet that shortfall.

      I have yet to hear Mr. Trudeau explain why Canada is setting the bar so low. If we can't adequately curb our domestic emissions what chance is there that Canada will stop producing by 2034?

      The idea that the "other governing party" would do any better is laughable.

      Delete
  2. Northern PoVMarch 23, 2022 at 10:40 AM

    Ending fossil fuel use by 2034?

    I'll buy that when I've finished paying off my purchase of the Brooklyn Bridge.

    Unless the West Antarctic Ice Sheet melts before then. Maybe we'll get serious then but more likely we'll be burning ff to migrate away from our coasts.

    The new war with Eastasia (or is it Eurasia?) will be the final nail in the coffin for any global action. Welcome to the Pyrocene.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The Disaffected LibMarch 23, 2022 at 11:42 AM

      The issue is fossil energy production, not consumption, NPoV. Not that, whether it's production or consumption will matter much. Yes, the Pyrocene indeed.

      Delete

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

Up in Smoke. 300 Sq. Mi. of Amazon Rainforest Lost Every Day.

Image
  The Amazon rainforest is disappearing at what should be an alarming rate. 312 sq. mi. or 808 sq. kms. every day. Over the past 30 years humans have destroyed a patch of the Amazon equal in area to the states of Texas and New Mexico . The Amazon – historically a great carbon absorber, since trees take in carbon dioxide and release oxygen – now releases more carbon than it stores, which adds to, rather helps to reduce, our global climate crisis. Deforestation rates decreased slightly from 2004 to 2012. But since then, they’re back on the rise, especially in the past couple of years, since Jair Bolsonaro became president of Brazil. In 2018, as Bolsonaro campaigned as a patriotic man of the people, scientists predicted that once the Amazon lost more than 25% of its tree cover, it would become a drier ecosystem, all because deforestation changes weather patterns (due to how trees respire), which in turn reduces rainfall. Furthermore, as the forest becomes fragmented, areas surrounded...
Read more

The Cognoscenti Syndrome

  There is a group of people I think of as the Cognoscenti, people who are well educated, very informed and of rapidly diminishing relevance. Their ranks include writers such as Chris Hedges and Glen Greenwald. These are people who have honed an almost Puritanical value system, readily finding fault in any direction. They are scathing in their attacks on Republicans and Democrats alike to the point where they become nihilists. They don't endorse. They prescribe. This is where they fail. They're unable to advocate for anything that might resonate with the public whose interests they argue are being trammeled. Donald Trump was bad but Joe Biden is scarcely better. This is where their elitism comes in.  74 million may have voted for Trump but, hey, they didn't know any better. The mob that stormed the Capitol. They were just victims of the system venting their frustrations. All the racism, bigotry, xenophobia, misogyny, white nationalism - inevitable side effects of their oppr...
Read more

Who Asks "Why?"

Every time there's a conflict between the Israelis and Palestinians, all we hear is 'why?'  Why, as in, whose fault is this? It's easier to affix blame if you can truncate the event. Pick a convenient start date, something recent. In this case we'll make it either the Israeli eviction of Arabs from Jerusalem or the scuffle that took place outside the mosque in response. If those don't work, let's go for Hamas launching unguided rockets into Israel. That's even better because it tags Hamas with the blame. The nice thing about this approach is you can just keep using it. It goes on and on, just as it has for the past half-century since the '67 war. You can even date this whole mess to the beginning of the occupation of the Palestinian territories. The Israelis are said to have called these periodic wars, "mowing the lawn." The idea is that, every now and then, you have to take these Arabs to the woodshed. And then you keep your powder dry unt...
Read more