World in denial on climate action five years after Paris accord, says Thunberg

[snoop1130]

World in denial on climate action five years after Paris accord, says Thunberg

 

Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg appears in a December 11, 2020 social media post, marking five years since the Paris Agreement COP21 conference. Instagram @gretathunberg via REUTERS

 

STOCKHOLM (Reuters) - Five years on from the Paris Agreement on climate change, the world remains in denial over the actions needed to prevent catastrophic warming, Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg said on Friday.

 

The deal was adopted on Dec. 12, 2015 by 196 countries but, so far, global leaders have failed to deliver on its promises, she said in a video that urged her 10.5 million Instagram followers to #FightFor1point5.

 

That was a reference to the ambition set out in the accord to hold the rise in average global temperatures to 1.5 Celsius above pre-industrial levels.

 

The video showed images of politicians and bureaucrats hugging and cheering when the Paris Agreement was signed.

 

Yet the five years subsequent years have been the hottest years ever recorded, Thunberg said in the video, which mixed her sober address to camera with dystopian images of fire and flooding.

 

Pledges so far to reduce greenhouse gas emissions put the world on track for a dire 3C or more of warming this century, with countries planning to produce double the amount of fossil fuels needed to hit the 1.5C target in the next decade alone, the United Nations and research groups said last week.

 

"Hypothetical targets are being set and big speeches are being given, yet when it comes to the immediate action we need, we are still in state of complete denial," Thunberg said.

 

"We are still speeding in the wrong direction."

 

Now 17, Thunberg rose to fame in 2018 when her school strike for climate change campaign became a viral sensation online, turning her lone protest into a global movement. Since then she has become a thorn in the side of the world's political elite.

 

She ended Friday's video on an optimistic note, saying the solution was in making people - rather than simply policymakers - aware of the extent of the climate crisis.

 

"Let's make this our main priority. Let's unite and spread awareness... We are the hope. We the people."

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-12-11

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[scammed]

+3 celsius would not be dire, it would be beneficial for life on earth and civilization, that was the case in roman warm period and medieval warm period, and it wont be different in modern warm period,

not that co2 plays a significant role in temperature, but it does make all the difference for plants and photosynthetic plankton, which all other life up the ladder hinges on, including greta

Edited December 11, 2020 by scammed

[stevenl]

Unfortunately she is correct, see also the first reaction here.

[KC 71]

i blame the parents

[rupert the bear]

the girls right unfortunately,rising sea levels/deforestation will wreak havoc.we see though hope in many countries across europe uk canada and even the USA at state levels.even some latino states the exceptions being brazil and to a smaller degree colombia which has a remarkable flora and fauna.it strangely came as a result of success in the anti narco war,areas protected by the crims now are exploited by timber thieves etc,where i disagree with greta is the focus on the west -china india brazil and indo is where the worst damage from deforestation and pollution emanates.corruption and vested interests are the prime movers ,lets take the region here,forest cover was massive 30 yrs or less ago. across vietnam laos camb thailand indo burma malaysia ph its been a holocaust,the greed of the tiger economic model has laid waste to massive ares.its difficult to slow down that level of greed but greta i have a suggestion,make eu companies black palm oil imports,period. end it.prawns too,its a very small price to pay,insist that mangroves go back and palm oils replanted with native forest. we will pay most of the cost.a good place to start.low lying cities everywhere will see it but here in asia aggh manila bkk jakarta busan tokyo even singapore,hk ,chinas coastal cities,the list goes on.indian cities are unlivable at times look at northern india the last few weeks a death zone.kill more this winter than covid there.wont happen in days- months and maybe longer but dead theyll be even here in bkk with markedly less pollution from flights and construction and better emissions controls its bad.africa one word over population kenyas pop is x5 it was in 63 when independence came,its unsustainable,end of story.

[placeholder]

10 hours ago, scammed said:

+3 celsius would not be dire, it would be beneficial for life on earth and civilization, that was the case in roman warm period and medieval warm period, and it wont be different in modern warm period,

not that co2 plays a significant role in temperature, but it does make all the difference for plants and photosynthetic plankton, which all other life up the ladder hinges on, including greta

Since the 19th century it's been known not just that CO2 is a greenhouse gas but exactly how potent it is in relation to the atmosphere. The Roman Warm Period and Medieval Warm period were not global. Nor was the average temp rise anything like 3 degrees celsius.

[soalbundy]

10 hours ago, stevenl said:

Unfortunately she is correct, see also the first reaction here.

Pretty obvious isn't it, the goal means sacrifices which would make any party that actually initiated any measures to lower Co2 non votable. 'We the people' sounds good but it is the people who passively reject any action being taken.

[herwin1234]

Little girls telling us what to do....

 

We shouldnt listen to her, nor to politicians, nor to Youtube vloggers, we only should listen to scientists. 

 

And they are saying ... well, by now you should know what they are saying.

 

Lets hope Biden gets back in the Paris climate deal. And lets watch the green progress that is being made in China...

[thaibeachlovers]

12 hours ago, snoop1130 said:

Five years on from the Paris Agreement on climate change, the world remains in denial over the actions needed to prevent catastrophic warming, Swedish environmental activist Greta Thunberg said on Friday.

No, the "world" is not in denial. IMO the "world" has decided that Thunberg is wrong and should go back to school where she might learn that little girls do not tell grown ups what to do.

[thaibeachlovers]

1 hour ago, rupert the bear said:

china india brazil and indo is where the worst damage from deforestation and pollution emanates.

You omitted Africa.

 

The hypocrisy of the politicians on board with Greta is that they are, IMO, doing sod all about forest clearance where ever it is happening. That's one thing where they could actually make a difference, but don't- is that puzzling?

 

I heard that air travel has been omitted from the targets to reduce, and if that is true it is a scandal, IMO.

Greta should be celebrating the demise of air travel, though I fully expect her to be flying along with all the delegates to the next climate conference. Business learned to do it by VDO, and the climate people need to do that too, but I doubt they will- far more fun flying to a big party at taxpayer's expense.

[thaibeachlovers]

49 minutes ago, soalbundy said:

Pretty obvious isn't it, the goal means sacrifices which would make any party that actually initiated any measures to lower Co2 non votable. 'We the people' sounds good but it is the people who passively reject any action being taken.

Indeed. Any politician that goes too far can expect ( hopefully ) to be given the order of the boot and booted right out the door of parliament at the next election.

[scammed]

1 hour ago, placeholder said:

Since the 19th century it's been known not just that CO2 is a greenhouse gas but exactly how potent it is in relation to the atmosphere. The Roman Warm Period and Medieval Warm period were not global. Nor was the average temp rise anything like 3 degrees celsius.

no, the imagined temp increase is based solely on guesses

if/any positive feedback comes into play.

the roman & medieval warm period was global,

and in the course of 25 years, from 1700 to 1725, temp increased 2 degree celsius in england, unprecedented and unmatched to this day, much to the relief of the brits

[placeholder]

1 hour ago, scammed said:

no, the imagined temp increase is based solely on guesses

if/any positive feedback comes into play.

the roman & medieval warm period was global,

and in the course of 25 years, from 1700 to 1725, temp increased 2 degree celsius in england, unprecedented and unmatched to this day, much to the relief of the brits

Nonsense. Belief is no substitute for knowledge. But I've only got a mobile now. Later I'll link to climatological research. Ya know, a thing called Science.

 

.

[thaibeachlovers]

25 minutes ago, scammed said:

you are not going to find a single solitary guess that doesnt

include guesses of positive feedback,

and the reason is that water vapor which makes up 99%

of greenhouse gasses almost completely already covers the bands in radiative transfer models where 0.0004% co2 could have a minute effect,

among with all the bands that co2 doesnt cover

IMO the best explanation for them using CO2 as the driver of climate change is that they can't tax water vapour.

 

IMO they give the game away when they keep on with the message that rich countries have to give lotsacash to poor countries.

[scammed]

26 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO the best explanation for them using CO2 as the driver of climate change is that they can't tax water vapour.

 

IMO they give the game away when they keep on with the message that rich countries have to give lotsacash to poor countries.

imo, part of it is a commie thing, fabricating reasons to attack  businesses and industrialization,

but part of it is religious in nature,

(do note the reference to 'since the industrialization') invoking the theology of original sin and the need to repent, lest nature/god will avenge with purifying fire and flood

Edited December 12, 2020 by scammed

[thaibeachlovers]

Just now, scammed said:

imo, part of it is a commie thing, fabricating reasons to attack  businesses and industrialization,

but part of it is religious in nature, invoking the theology of original sin and the need to repent, lest nature/god will avenge

Disagree on the religious aspect. More political IMO.

[placeholder]

41 minutes ago, thaibeachlovers said:

IMO the best explanation for them using CO2 as the driver of climate change is that they can't tax water vapour.

 

IMO they give the game away when they keep on with the message that rich countries have to give lotsacash to poor countries.

As I've pointed out to you before, the day that it starts to precipitate dry ice, you might have a point.

[scammed]

14 minutes ago, placeholder said:

As I've pointed out to you before, the day that it starts to rain dry ice, you might have a point.

no, the 'victims' of the evil west are indeed fishing for a handout

https://www.researchgate.net/publication/237318476_Open_letter_to_President_Mohamed_Nasheed_of_the_Maldives

[Rimmer]

A post making an unattributed claim has been removed, also a reply

[nobodysfriend]

16 hours ago, scammed said:

+3 celsius would not be dire, it would be beneficial for life on earth and civilization, that was the case in roman warm period and medieval warm period, and it wont be different in modern warm period,

not that co2 plays a significant role in temperature, but it does make all the difference for plants and photosynthetic plankton, which all other life up the ladder hinges on, including greta

At 3 degrees of warming, many glaciers and ice caps melt, boosting sea levels rise and engulfing low areas. Deserts would grow and storms would become more violent, leaving more areas uninhabitable.

 

 

 

[nobodysfriend]

4 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

she might learn that little girls do not tell grown ups what to do.

 

 

Grown up's need to be told what to do ... alone they do not seem to know . They are generally to occupied with their own consumerism to accept an opinion that is different to what they think is most important in life ...

[Donga]

17 hours ago, stevenl said:

Unfortunately she is correct, see also the first reaction here.

 

Greta is correct about all the silly hypothetical targets, but she is guilty in encouraging the righteous naivety. Sweden has 50% hydro and 30% nuclear power. There is no country able to generate over 50% non hydro or thermal renewable energy. And yet all this focus on solar and wind as the righteous have no clue about the limitations due inherent intermittency. 

Battery storage is for minutes, not days. Righteous don't like fossil fuels, so gas is on the nose for most of them as is the obvious solution, nuclear - safest energy source per KwH by a country mile. Search it if in disbelief.

So what are the Europeans doing to meet their renewable targets? Burning US imported wood chips, the fastest growing energy source in Europe. Biomass fuel is now more used than solar and wind combined - because it's not intermittent.. https://www.vox.com/science-and-health/2019/3/4/18216045/renewable-energy-wood-pellets-biomass

Until the activists and the governments they influence get real about dealing with renewables limitations, protest about US wood chips and recognise nuclear energy as the way forward, they are pissing in the wind.

Edited December 12, 2020 by Donga

[scammed]

1 hour ago, nobodysfriend said:

At 3 degrees of warming, many glaciers and ice caps melt, boosting sea levels rise and engulfing low areas. Deserts would grow and storms would become more violent, leaving more areas uninhabitable.

 

 

 

the less ice the merrier, nothing is going to be engulfed,

warmer will for the most part mean wetter and more flush fora, like the flora we got in thailand,

storms will become less violent, leaving more areas habitable

[scammed]

1 hour ago, nobodysfriend said:

 

 

Grown up's need to be told what to do ... alone they do not seem to know . They are generally to occupied with their own consumerism to accept an opinion that is different to what they think is most important in life ...

so its consumerism that aches you, that is, capitalism.

would you prefer we are forced to live as peasants,

eeking out a living from the earth with muscle power ?

pol pot got it right, humans are oxes,

and should drag the plow 'out of own force', in the purest interpretation of karl marx, sod education

Edited December 12, 2020 by scammed

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, herwin1234 said:

Little girls telling us what to do....

 

We shouldnt listen to her, nor to politicians, nor to Youtube vloggers, we only should listen to scientists. 

 

And they are saying ... well, by now you should know what they are saying.

 

Lets hope Biden gets back in the Paris climate deal. And lets watch the green progress that is being made in China...

Since this particular little (?) almost 18 year old girl is saying largely what scientists are saying, what's the problem?

[placeholder]

7 hours ago, soalbundy said:

Pretty obvious isn't it, the goal means sacrifices which would make any party that actually initiated any measures to lower Co2 non votable. 'We the people' sounds good but it is the people who passively reject any action being taken.

Does it? Internal combustion vehicles have become vastly more efficient. Is that being rejected. Public support is overwhelming for accelerating the pace of growth of renewable energy. Is the public in revolt over using more efficient light bulbs? Or higher energy efficiency standards for appliances?

[placeholder]

6 hours ago, thaibeachlovers said:

No, the "world" is not in denial. IMO the "world" has decided that Thunberg is wrong and should go back to school where she might learn that little girls do not tell grown ups what to do.

Maybe if by the "world" you mean the small circle of denialists. But in the real world, not so much.

Wind and Solar Are Crushing Fossil Fuels

Record clean energy investment outpaces gas and coal 2 to 1.

Wind and Solar Are Crushing Fossil Fuels - Bloomberg

 

[stevenl]

17 minutes ago, scammed said:

the less ice the merrier, nothing is going to be engulfed,

warmer will for the most part mean wetter and more flush fora, like the flora we got in thailand,

storms will become less violent, leaving more areas habitable

The experts strongly disagree with you.

[soalbundy]

15 minutes ago, placeholder said:

Does it? Internal combustion vehicles have become vastly more efficient. Is that being rejected. Public support is overwhelming for accelerating the pace of growth of renewable energy. Is the public in revolt over using more efficient light bulbs? Or higher energy efficiency standards for appliances?

No of course not but only as long as they are not seriously affected. Co2 has actually increased not diminished despite these important advances. Much more needs to be done but there will be a resistance line at some point so it has to be done slowly, too slowly perhaps. I shall be dead before the full effects come crashing down but my children will still be here, happy the man who has a strong door to close behind him.

The sun has decreased its activity in recent years, sunspots have almost disappeared so one should expect cooling over the next 10 or so years mitigating man's destructive efforts but despite this the world has got warmer not cooler.....we shall see.

Edited December 12, 2020 by soalbundy

[scammed]

10 minutes ago, stevenl said:

The experts strongly disagree with you.

the viral experts disagree, but the data agree