[yor_on]

If that is what you mean you have a really good point to how people thinks, the way we define somethings worth, and ones wallet.

[yor_on]

And the game, built on values and beliefs.

[yor_on]

What it means is that the global warming we see today is different from those earlier extinction events.  We're digging up fossils, producing green house gasses as CO2 and methane. They store heat, releasing it they warm up earth and oceans, melting the Arctic and Antarctic, creating wild fires, storms, floods and droughts, and decay. And doing so releasing even more CO2 formerly bound in the ground. And when it comes to the oceans there will be a boundary for how much CO2 it can store, over some defined time period. That one will depend on stuff like winds, underwater streams, circulation between deep water and shallow etc. It's a whole earth system changing.

I should add oxygen deprivation (dead spots) and acidity to what happens in our oceans today. Combine that with over fishing getting more desperate the less life exist in those shallow layers of the ocean where we catch most of our our food fish. And then we have artificial fertilizers and other compounds as plastics leaking out in them, topsoil deteriorating, getting worse on containing CO2 etc etc etc. If I made a whole list of our disasters I would need to get drunk.


syntax

[yor_on]

And the reason we keep doing it?

Our game of inequality.

[yor_on]

Should add what that game builds on. Greed. egoism, ignorance and hubris. There are other variables too naturally but I would call those the main ingredients of the game. Then how it express itself will depend on wealth and social structures. As when it comes to 'Aid', or 'human rights' etc etc.

[yor_on]

All of it played from a top -> down  definition, in where the bottom layers main purpose is to generate the profits making the top layers able to 'decide'.

[yor_on]

What I think you need to understand, from my point of view, is that the ground from where it builds are you. Also that the game produce streamlined 'role models' that 'fought' their way up. Combine those two and ask yourself how probable it is that this game will change? That's a main reason for why I tell you that there will be no revolution coming, no matter who wins a civil war.


syntax

[yor_on]

All of, leaving a possible change to the few countries closest to a democracy. And the change must come from you, demanding it.

[yor_on]

And if you won't?

Well, there will be other species.

[yor_on]

What it will do, a real democracy, is to change the weighting, it won't take away your greed, egoism ignorance and hubris. that one is for you to handle. What it will do is to give other values than profit a chance to be heard, without interpretations. It will show us who we are.

[yor_on]

So you might wonder how stupid we are?

How about this  " The simmering tensions between Greece and Turkey came close to boiling point over the summer after Athens deployed ships into the Aegean in “heightened readiness” after Turkey announced plans to explore for gas near a Greek island. "

Who can you blame?

Nobody seems to get it, and governments fail to make it understood. The UK f.ex is going for gas, so is Russia and I would expect Germany to be unable to avoid it too. There are no real solutions to storing energy from wind farms etc, and using batteries we create a new type of pollution. And the GDP must rise, how else can we prove ourselves?

you see, if you keep yourself uninformed, and think your government knows best, which is what you do, you only have yourself to blame. It's profits and it will be profits, until it breaks down.


spelling

[yor_on]

" While El Niño, the warm phase of the climatic phenomenon, can trigger drought in Australia and India, and increase cyclones in the tropical Pacific, La Niña can cause eastern Pacific sea temperatures to fall by up to 3-5C, which has a cooling effect on global temperatures.

According to Taalas, however, this is now more than offset by global heating, and 2020 “remains on track to be one of the warmest years on record”, with 2016-20 expected to be the warmest five-year period on record.

“La Niña years now are warmer even than years with strong El Niño events of the past,” said Taalas. "

https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2020/oct/29/2020-warmest-year-record-la-nina-climate-crisis

[yor_on]

And this is almost funny, if it wasn't so sad.

" “The common thread is just uncertainty,” said Kareem Shaya, a gun rights advocate and another founder of Open Source Defense, which has organized dozens of video training sessions for first-time gun owners this year. “A feeling of, hey, if nobody else is going to be able to take care of me, push comes to shove, I want to be able to take care of myself.” "

That's how you rise the tension, get yourself a gun, be prepared and shoot first.
Your shopping trip will never be so exciting as now.

https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2020/oct/29/coronavirus-pandemic-americans-gun-sales

[yor_on]

Yeah, a USA without environmental laws, but with a gun in the shopping center. That's how you do it.

[yor_on]

And this is funny. " Bushfires are annual events across Australia, but the scale, length, and severity was on the rise, the report said.... The commission did not make any recommendations relating to Australia’s greenhouse gas emissions, but said the level of risk would rise as global emissions continued to climb. "

Someone else, right?
Not me.

[yor_on]

Ahh sh* 

" According to the British readout, Johnson “stressed that we need bold action to address climate change, noting that the UK’s experience demonstrates that driving economic growth and reducing emissions can go hand in hand”. "

Yep, global warming will be profitable.
Rest assured.

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/oct/28/australian-account-of-scott-morrisons-talk-with-boris-johnson-omits-reference-to-net-zero-emissions

[yor_on]

So who can scare a politician?

Well, a bank that takes a stand can.

" A climate change commitment from ANZ to halt lending to its largest customers unless the businesses can prove carbon transition plans by next year has been cautiously welcomed by conservationists, but enraged senior Nationals MPs.

ANZ’s new emissions policies, outlined in a climate change statement at its full year results presentation on Thursday morning, aim to support efforts to achieve net zero carbon emissions by 2050 – but not net zero gas or oil by 2050 – with significant steps to be taken by the 2021 financial year to shape the bank’s operations until 2030.

ANZ will no longer bank any new business customers with a more than 10% exposure to thermal coal, and will demand “specific, time bound and public diversification strategies” from existing customers with more than 50% thermal coal exposures. "

Which is funny too, considering that the bank still will finance oil and gas. But it says something about Australia's politics, and global warming, doesn't it?

https://www.theguardian.com/australia-news/2020/oct/29/nationals-call-for-anz-boycott-after-banks-push-for-net-zero-emissions

then again, it's about profits, isn't it

[yor_on]

Gas at a Crossroads:    Why The EU Should Not Continue To Expand Its Gas Infrastructure

https://globalenergymonitor.org/wp-content/uploads/2020/10/Gas_at_a_Crossroads_EU.pdf

" If all this infrastructure were built, the spending would average €10 billion euros per year over the 2020s.

Companiesʼ plans to expand the EU’s gas infrastructure stand in striking contrast to EU requirements to cut greenhouse missions to at least 40% below 1990 levels by 2030, as well as the goal,  backed by the EU Parliament and the European Commission, with the support of all Member States except Poland, to achieve net-zero emissions by 2050. Once built, gas infrastructure can be expected to last for decades. Historically, power plants usually last at least 30 years, pipelines 40 years, and LNG import terminals more than 40 years.

Widely used scenarios, including from the European Commission, show agreement that cutting EU emissions to net-zero by 2050 will require sharply reducing the consumption of fossil gas."

With the UK as a leading consumer.

[yor_on]

So how long would it take to build a nuclear power plant? Well, everything between 3.5 years to 33 according to http://euanmearns.com/how-long-does-it-take-to-build-a-nuclear-power-plant/

The average time is about 8 years.

It's really not worth discussing the CO2 production involved in the materials, It can't be much worse than any other construction works, as pipelines LNG etc. What you get building them though is something that makes it possible to reach those EU goals.
=

Heh, thinking of it they should be a lot less.

[yor_on]

It will add to another type of pollution, that's correct, presuming we use the plutonium producing blue prints all nuclear waving idiots so love. If we don't, instead building molten salt, it won't.