We’ve apparently entered a new epoch.
It has been proposed but not generally accepted yet.
Further down:
As of April 2022, neither the International Commission on Stratigraphy (ICS) nor the International Union of Geological Sciences (IUGS) has officially approved the term as a recognised subdivision of geologic time,[13][14] although the Anthropocene Working Group (AWG) of the Subcommission on Quaternary Stratigraphy (SQS) of the ICS voted in April 2016 to proceed towards a formal golden spike (GSSP) proposal to define the Anthropocene epoch in the geologic time scale (GTS) and presented the recommendation to the International Geological Congress in August 2016.[15] In May 2019, the AWG voted in favour of submitting a formal proposal to the ICS by 2021,[16] locating potential stratigraphic markers to the mid-20th century of the common era.[17][16][18] This time period coincides with the start of the Great Acceleration, a post-WWII time period during which socioeconomic and Earth system trends increase at a dramatic rate,[19] and the Atomic Age.
It’s all the President’s fault when he’s a Democrat and it’s all Congress’ fault when the President is a Republican. And if Congress and the President are Republicans, it’s Deep State’s fault.
Some of the rhetoric will undoubtedly begin, “When Obama was president…”
Then my parody was perfect!
Credit where due: That was a good rejoinder.
If you’d like a really good comeback, you could write, “I pledge to start double-checking what I post, going forward, and to read my own cites carefully to make sure they actually say what I claim, and to immediately own up to any misrepresentations I make without trying to spin them to make them look like the true facts, although the opposite of what I claimed, actually support what I claimed.” Sure would be egg on my face!
I think we have a few intertwined issues here. In no particular order:
Certainly, the goal is to reduce production of fossil fuels in Canada. It’s clear that this would reduce employment in the sector, so it would be necessary to retrain people to work in other sectors. I don’t see how that’s bullshit, apart from generic “Trudeau bad!”.
Is your preoccupation to heat and light Alberta’s homes and buildings, or is it to export fossil fuels to other countries?
This government site quotes the Canadian Hydro Association saying that there is potential for 11.5 GW of additional hydroelectric power in Alberta. Maybe it’s hype, and there’s only 5 GW that could really be developed without flooding major cities. The tweet above says the current installed capacity is under 1 GW.
Nuclear is a good solution too, I’m glad to see it’s backed by the conservatives; hopefully it will gain social acceptability in the near future.
So yeah, Alberta and Saskatchewan would quite probably make less money. Equalization is a mess that’s been discussed at length here and elsewhere, and is certainly used as a weapon by the UCP. I don’t think it’s intractable.
When the fuck did this become the Sam Stone show? I think we see how the fascists will handle climate change, with a bunch of bullshit distractions.
I hate that you use a John Prine song for your user name. Fuck you.
Also, anyone else think he and Octopus’s are the same guy?
The moment it was moved to the pit. See also Climate Change Deniers; What more proof do you need?
Flies on shit, white on rice. ‘Not a climate change denier’, ‘not an Elmo fanboi’, etc.
Instead of talking about the personalities involved in the climate debate why not limit the conversation to the science itself? It would be a lot more helpful. The economics and lfe style changes involved are staggering so certainly worthy of open discussion.
If you were a highly paid lawyer, and you loved the law, and had dedicated your life to the law, how would you feel if someone came along and said, “Hey, we’re making working as a lawyer illegal. But don’t worry, here’s a $15/hr job putting insulation in people’s houses!”
You might be pretty pissed off. And you’d be wondering how to feed your family now that your $150,000/yr oil patch job is gone.
Then you have all the towns and cities up north, including mine, that will take a huge hit. These places were built on oil revenue, and they will be in trouble.
The Alberta Government could help, except that under Trudeau’s plan we’ll lose $13 billion per YEAR in Alberta government revenue from oil. That’s about $3,000 per citizen lost, per year.
No one else is taking this kind of hit to their economy in Canada. Quebec stands to gain from all this, because they have hydro to sell. Ontario is okay, and BC has lots of hydro. Alberta and Saskatchewan just don’t have any alternative resources, and both provinces were among the poorest in Canada before they discovered oil and gas. It’s not a surprise that Albertans might get a bit upset over going back to that.
Both, obviously. We’re facing a double whammy. The liberals want to dismantle our primary income source while at the same time making completely unreasonable demands about being ‘net zero’ by 3030. My water and electricity bill last month was $735. That was before the latest bump to the carbon tax. I can’t imagine the bills farmers and business owners are getting.
I don’t know enough about the needs of hydro generation to have an opinion on whether there is that much hydro capacity available. You can probably forget about the Red Deer basin, though. That entire area is pretty heavily populated and commercialized.
The other problem is that as the best hydro sites get used up, the rest of them get decreasingly profitable. It’s like wind; wind is quite profitable if you have a great site, but the value rapidly drops off as you move to second-best and third-best sites, and the cost of wind goes up substantially.
And finally, the other problem is that the environmental left is trying to stop new hydro projects. They’ve been tying up BC’s new hydro project with lawfare for a while. You can expect the same here. Indigenous groups as well.
As for wind and solar, wind is highly variable in most of Alberta, and solar power sucks completely in Northern Canada. In winter we can go weeks at a time with both wind and solar being under 2% capacity. And of course whenever it is calm, night becoms a problem because there is no wind or solar. Alberta has really nothing else to fall back on that isn’t fossil fuels except a little hydro, a little biomass, and importing energy.
One quick word about capacity and capacity factor: pay attention to it, because it really matters. For example, people often claim that solar is cheaper than nuclear, because a solar installation of a certain nameplate capacity is cheaper than an equivcalent nuclear plant.
The problem is that across America, solar only delivers about 24% of capacity annually. In Canada it’s a fair bit lower, especially in the northern regions. Nuclear and gas, on the other hand, can run in the high 90% of capacity, 24/7. In January, across the US solar power averaged 7.7% of capacity.
The other problem is that nuclear and coal and natural gas are ‘dispatchable’. Wind and solar are not, and making them dispatchable requires storage which we do not have and will not have before 2035.
People who are sad - sometimes they wear a frown
And people who are kings - sometimes they wear a crown
But all the people who don’t fit
Get the only fun they get
From people puttin’ people down
People puttin’ people down
-John Prine
I think he wrote that about you.
Kids, we destroyed the planet and doomed billions of you to painful deaths from war, famine and disease, but not doing so would have pissed some people off.
Please do! You’re inability to comprehend even basic science will be a welcome relief to the Sam_Stone Show.
In 15 years, with the growth in demand at home, Hydro-Québec may not have such huge electricity surpluses anymore, and is looking to expand its production capacity. There is still some room for exports and heavy industry, but Hydro is already being selective about new heavy customers (bye bye crypto farms). The part about “gaining from this” is just the usual Trudeau=Québec bashing.
@Sam_Stone , you do know, I trust, that it’s really unwise to base your region’s entire economy on one industry, and that if you find yourself with an economy based on one industry, you should really start trying to diversify before you’re forced to by forces beyond your control. Which will happen, eventually, with every single-industry economy.
Narrator: He did not.
I am not a scientist; I am a consumer and a voter who is getting inadequate information. It is being sold as something that is too important to delay because of frivolous questions that might slow down the process of curbing global warming and have catastrophic results. Legitimate challenges are being buried or outright censored. We have plenty of science guys on here, lets here from some of them. They say 98% of all scientists agree that human activity is changing the climate. That is the most basic tenant you could possibly put forth. As soon as you start adding little details the agreement percentages rapidly start dropping. When you ask what are considered optimum levels you can’t get an answer. Surly you would think little details like this should be established before anything else. Every science report I have read is loaded with could, or possibly, or might’s,. Nothing is hard and firm. We currently have a climate science program in development that will hopefully produce real climate scientists that can give us some real answers. Instead of a couple of narcissistic ego maniacs globe trotting for their own purposes.
For 300 million years levels averaged around 2,000 parts per million and temps were just fine animals were just fine, as a matter of fact it was all doing considerably better than it is now. Nothing on earth is showing any ill signs from carbon, on the contrary everything seems to be doing better.
You have, I read the threads, it didn’t help.