Jump to content

Rich nations fail as Thailand meets its emissions target


webfact

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 76
  • Created
  • Last Reply
8 hours ago, Stargrazer9889 said:
  • For the climate change green people who think that there is no need for oil any more.

Please look at all the things made from oil, plastics and nylons that are in your cell phones ,

your athletic sport shoes,  gym bags, tennis rackets and balls, bike seats and tires. For 

car owners the door panels, roof panels instrument pael, wiring and many componants

 in the engine compartment. In your homes many thngs built with oil. Your TV, the handles

on all your pots and pans, your tooth brush, most of your toys or your kids toys. Y.our snow

skiis or water skiis, your boat or yacht. I am just putting this in so that people can explain to the

less intelligent people how their world would be different if there was no oil being used on

this planet for so many things that are not just the gas and diesel in vehicles. I have heard of so many

saying oh leave the oil in the ground. Just no penalties to the populations like Carbon Taxes.

Geezer

As you say oil is far too important for our standard of living to give it up but consumption can still be reduced. Coal is what we should be giving up as soon as possible. It is a far bigger problem than oil.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2018 at 3:14 AM, Faikham said:

US Greenhouse Gas emissions were down 1.7% in 2018.

 

Germany, EU, India, and China all up.

 

Headline should say "Of the world's largest GHG emitters, only the US shows success"

The US has a very long way to go before it can be proud of its GHG emission rates. The chart below shows just how bad a starting position the US has. For many years I heard the US produced 25% of the worlds pollution and had 5% of the worlds population. 

The headline should say "Of the world's largest GHG emitters, only US, Australia and Canada are way behind the rest"

I don't know the criteria for getting on this list as there are some smaller countries that are far worse.co2-emissions-per-capita.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On ‎12‎/‎6‎/‎2018 at 7:25 PM, dotpoom said:

There we go again ..1st response..."negative"...to a positive story???

 "Negativity"...first out of the traps ever time.

  

It is only a "positive story" if it presented absolute, credible facts. Previous wild reporting by government departments have left room to question credibility.

I think the first post that you refer to is on balance (considering all).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2018 at 2:41 PM, chang1 said:

This is the sort of statement that fuels the conspiracy believer's who don't look any further. Here is a more complete explanation I found,

 

?

it is a fact...it's about selling windmills ,nuclear power plants, gas
even if the country lies on coal deposits to make developing

countries less competitive and make tons of money.


it is dressed in beautiful words about climate protection
as, for example, the colonization of Africa was dressed

in beautiful words about 'civilizing savages' but it was only about money!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, marqus12 said:

it is a fact...it's about selling windmills ,nuclear power plants, gas
even if the country lies on coal deposits to make developing

countries less competitive and make tons of money.


it is dressed in beautiful words about climate protection
as, for example, the colonization of Africa was dressed

in beautiful words about 'civilizing savages' but it was only about money!

Coal mines will go bankrupt and will be bought for peanuts
by international corporations and then the coal will be gassed.

the fight with climate changes is worth the wagons and containers

of gold

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2018 at 9:14 AM, chang1 said:

Have a look at how many people die prematurely from burning coal and compare it to how many nuclear power plants kill. 

 

Here is the first google result -

 

However, the burning of coal for electricity is profoundly damaging to human health. Coal is responsible for over 800,000 premature deaths per year globally and many millions more serious and minor illnesses. In China alone, around 670,000 people die prematurely per year as a result of coal-related air pollution.

 

Thank God for that?

population  reduction sorted.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 12/7/2018 at 1:54 PM, Retiredandhappyhere said:

My shopping at a local Tesco store yesterday was placed in a large brown paper bag instead of the usual plastic variety and I was quite impressed, until it split open when I took it out of the car and everything fell out.  I would commend them for trying however, except that I understand that it was a one-day only change to help the environment, so perhaps not very effective in the long run.  Next time when visiting 7/11 or Tesco etc, I will be sure to remember to take my own re-usable bag, instead of just trying to refuse the inevitable offer of plastic bags for literally everything, even for a single purchase.  Thailand must really start to take this problem seriously and either ban plastic bags altogether, unless they are degradable, or start charging for them, before the oceans become an even bigger rubbish bin, killing most of the living creatures in it.

i  burnt  mine,  went  up  real  well!????

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The Mae Moh mine near Lampang in the north fuels electricity generation for much of the Chiang Mai area. The power station is burning lignite from Mae Moh, the dirtiest of the coals. So excuse me if I take the emissions report with a grain or two of salt.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 I really hate per capita charts.  The heavy polluting countries are India with its coal powerplants,

its old trains, trucks and cars. Factories and industries.  China, Russia as well  for similar reasons,

and the USA. Africa and ME,  do they use modern oil platforms, and refineries?

Geezer

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Stargrazer9889 said:

 I really hate per capita charts.  The heavy polluting countries are India with its coal powerplants,

its old trains, trucks and cars. Factories and industries.  China, Russia as well  for similar reasons,

and the USA. Africa and ME,  do they use modern oil platforms, and refineries?

Geezer

What is wrong with per capita charts? Is it that they clearly show which countries are creating far more GHG emissions than they should? Why should someone in Canada or Australia get away with producing far more GHG's than an Indian? How can you reasonably ask an Indian to cut his emissions by 50% when they are already only about 10% of what an American produces? It doesn't matter how clean you burn coal, oil and gas you still produce similar amounts of CO2. If the Chinese and Indians created GHG's at the same rate as Americans, climate change would probably be irreversible by now. Per country charts are pointless as they don't show things like, one American causes as much pollution as almost 10 Indians. If you divided India and China up into 50 small countries would these new countries be any greener?

Sure Third World countries produce a lot of toxic emissions due to poor regulations and processes which maybe shown better on a per country chart or a per square mile per country chart as it is more of a local problem.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, marqus12 said:

Coal mines will go bankrupt and will be bought for peanuts
by international corporations and then the coal will be gassed.

the fight with climate changes is worth the wagons and containers

of gold

You should have paid more attention in school. I know there is a lot of misinformation floating around the internet but it is not that hard to find facts from internationally respected organisations. 

Climate change has been emphatically proven as a real problem that is not being addressed with the urgency that is required. 

Where are the facts to back up your claims? If coal is that precious that we have made up climate change to get more of it, why has the UK shut down most of its mines and spending a fortune on reducing GHG emissions? Not everything is a conspiracy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

18 hours ago, Lacessit said:

The Mae Moh mine near Lampang in the north fuels electricity generation for much of the Chiang Mai area. The power station is burning lignite from Mae Moh, the dirtiest of the coals. So excuse me if I take the emissions report with a grain or two of salt.

The report is only looking at CO2 and other GHGs not the toxic crap that kills people. I can believe the report as it says emissions are up.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.





×
×
  • Create New...