Australian Politics Forum - after climate and water?

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 16436 Gender:	Re: after climate and water? Reply #15 - Oct 18^th, 2019 at 12:25pm BigP wrote on Oct 18^th, 2019 at 12:07pm: I hear they will be renaming Australia , to Adustbowl lol
Back to top	IP Logged

Jasin Gold Member Offline Posts: 46595 Gender:	Re: after climate and water? Reply #16 - Oct 18^th, 2019 at 5:58pm I honestly think 'Forests, Jungles, etc' will be a thing of the past soon. Maybe in little contained 'Parks & Reserves' where you can hike to any edge of them in a day. Strange how we cover the most fertile areas with cement and tar.
Back to top	AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY. IP Logged

The_Barnacle Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6205 Melbourne Gender:	Re: after climate and water? Reply #17 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 10:12am Jasin wrote on Oct 18^th, 2019 at 5:58pm: Strange how we cover the most fertile areas with cement and tar. For once you make a valid point. Sydney and Melbourne were both established in (comparatively) fertile areas. Suburban sprawl is swallowing up all the areas that once were farms and market gardens.
Back to top	The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said. IP Logged

The_Barnacle Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 6205 Melbourne Gender:	Re: after climate and water? Reply #18 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 10:46am lee wrote on Oct 18^th, 2019 at 12:17pm: Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink, something that (some) other countries are trying to achieve. No it isn't
Back to top	The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said. IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16436
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #19 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 11:18am

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 10:46am:

No it isn't

Well then show me where I am wrong.

I can show satellite derived images or I can let you do the calculations from our chief scientist.

The only reason that Australia does not show our net sink status more widely is that our forests were not included as per Kyoto Protocol and have never subsequently been added. We were given a notional carbon status.

You like to make claims. You never follow them up to show you are correct. Roll Eyes

Back to top

IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #20 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 11:37am

lee wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 11:18am:

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 10:46am:

lee wrote on Oct 18^th, 2019 at 12:17pm:

Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink, something that (some) other countries are trying to achieve.

No it isn't
Grin

Well then show me where I am wrong.

You are the one making the claim that Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink.
The onus is on you to provide evidence

Back to top

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16436
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #21 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:18pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 11:37am:

The onus is on you to provide evidence

Fine

See those little red dots on the east coast? Those are positive emissions. The red in Arnhem land is from the Mangroves etc. No heavy industry there.

From data GOSAT (IBUKI) satellite.

https://wattsupwiththat.com/2014/07/05/the-revenge-of-the-climate-reparations/

I know you don't like Watts. but can you show the data is wrong?

https://www.chiefscientist.gov.au/2009/12/which-plants-store-more-carbon-in-aust...

Use the figures in the text and a conservative 1t/ha. Remember Australian Mountain Ash stores up to 10 times CO2 as other species.

Now I have done that, it is up to you to disprove it. If you can. Wink

Back to top

IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #22 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:39pm

I won't say it's wrong, but i will say that it is misleading (as is always the case with deniers)

Perhaps the biggest deception is using the year 2010.
It just happens to be the year after the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires and 2010 represents the end of the Millennial drought.
Lots of plant regrowth skewing the results.

Australia is highly urbanised yet the map doesn't show how much CO2 Sydney and Melbourne actually emits so is pretty meaningless.

So in summary this doesn't show that Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink.

Back to top

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

lee

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 16436
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #23 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:50pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:39pm:

I won't say it's wrong, but i will say that it is misleading (as is always the case with deniers)

Who denies anything petal?

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:39pm:

Perhaps the biggest deception is using the year 2010.
It just happens to be the year after the 2009 Black Saturday bushfires and 2010 represents the end of the Millennial drought.
Lots of plant regrowth skewing the results.

You mean the 2010 floods sequestered more CO2? Grin

But perhaps it was the rainfall. Wink

And by about 220Mt of CO2e. so the rainfall increased the sequestration by over 40%? Grin

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:39pm:

Australia is highly urbanised yet the map doesn't show how much CO2 Sydney and Melbourne actually emits so is pretty meaningless.

If it isn't red it isn't a net emitter. Wink

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:39pm:

So in summary this doesn't show that Australia is a net carbon dioxide sink.

Oh it does petal, you are just a denier. Grin

Now it is time for you to prove your assertion that it isn't. What you have written is not proof of anything. Wink

And the maths was to hard for you in the link to Australia's Chief Scientist? Grin

Back to top

IP Logged

lee Gold Member Offline Australian Politics Posts: 16436 Gender:	Re: after climate and water? Reply #24 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 1:06pm BTW - According to the garudian graphic the 2010 CO2e for the year was ......560.4Mt https://www.theguardian.com/environment/2017/dec/11/australias-transport-emissio... How could they get that so egregiously wrong .. the satellite of course it couldn't be the garudian or from where they derived their data.
Back to top	IP Logged

Jasin

Gold Member

Offline

Posts: 46595
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #25 - Oct 19^th, 2019 at 3:04pm

The_Barnacle wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 10:12am:

Jasin wrote on Oct 18^th, 2019 at 5:58pm:

Strange how we cover the most fertile areas with cement and tar.

For once you make a valid point.

Sydney and Melbourne were both established in (comparatively) fertile areas. Suburban sprawl is swallowing up all the areas that once were farms and market gardens.

Yes - two very fertile areas, now gone. Most of the (austral, etc) western Basin 'Rural' of Sydney is being 'Burbed' over for more SuperMarket Revenue Income just a bus station away.

Back to top

AIMLESS EXTENTION OF KNOWLEDGE HOWEVER, WHICH IS WHAT I THINK YOU REALLY MEAN BY THE TERM 'CURIOSITY', IS MERELY INEFFICIENCY. I AM DESIGNED TO AVOID INEFFICIENCY.

IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #26 - Oct 20^th, 2019 at 9:41am

lee wrote on Oct 19^th, 2019 at 12:50pm:

You mean the 2010 floods sequestered more CO2? Grin

Wow, I didn't realise that you were so stupid that I would have to spell it out for you

record rains in 2010 after bushfires and a long drought made for huge amounts of regrowth which made Australia (temporarily) a carbon sink

Quote:

Record rains made Australia a giant green global carbon sink

Record-breaking rains triggered so much new growth across Australia that the continent turned into a giant green carbon sink to rival tropical rainforests including the Amazon, our new research shows.

And that had a global impact. While atmospheric carbon dioxide still rose in 2011, it grew at a much lower rate – nearly 20% lower – than the average growth over the previous decade.

Almost 60% of the higher than normal carbon uptake that year, or 840 million tons, happened in Australia. That was due to a combination of factors, including geography and a run of very dry years, followed by record-breaking rains in 2010 and 2011.
https://blog.csiro.au/record-rains-made-australia-a-giant-green-global-carbon-si...

So it looks like whatsupwiththat cherry picked a particularly favorable year
But that's no surprise as it's the MO for deniers

So now that we are in one of our worst droughts on record what do you think are the chances that we are still a net carbon sink Grin

Back to top

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10958
Australia
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #27 - Oct 20^th, 2019 at 10:28am

freediver wrote on May 2^nd, 2007 at 4:00pm:

Suppose that in 50 years time we are getting all of our energy from solar, wind, hydro and other renewables and most of our water from desalination and recycling. Electricity and food would be more expensive, but probably not prohibitive. What then would limit our population growth? Is it simply not feasible to support large scale agriculture from water that is desalinated and pumped inland using renewable energy sources?

Look at history, when the majority are starving and homeless the first books to be burned will be the economics books to keep warm.

The law of the jungle doesn't recognise feasibility and per capita.

You still think there will be a hierarchy and elite dictating terms..?

They will be the first hanged from the nearest tree for letting it get to this point.

Back to top

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

Ajax

Gold Member

Offline

CO2 has never controlled
temperature on Earth

Posts: 10958
Australia
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #28 - Oct 20^th, 2019 at 10:34am

zoso wrote on May 5^th, 2007 at 1:39pm:

In 2003, the US was emitting 20 tonnes of CO2 per person, per year (Australia is something similar), China was emitting 2.7 tonnes per person per year... So please, lets be fair about this, China has 1/6th of the worlds population, they can be emitting a whole lot more CO2 than the US in total, and still the average chinese will be living quite the humble existence.

It is the first world countries that need to curb emissions, stop looking at everyone else and start looking at your own lifestyle.

Lead the way buddy get rid of

mobile phone
I-pad
Computer
No electricity in your house
No cars or trains trams or buses only push bikes
No aeroplanes
No tv or entertainment that uses power.
No plastic products
Everything has to be done manually.

Might as well live in a cave.

You wiling to show the way.

BTW Australian emits 1% of manmade greenhouse gases which is absorbed by Australia eco-systems..

Wake the f@rk up and stop listening to the oligarchy.

Back to top

« Last Edit: Oct 20^th, 2019 at 10:57am by Ajax »

1. There has never been a more serious assault on our standard of living than Anthropogenic Global Warming..Ajax
2. "One hour of freedom is worth more than 40 years of slavery & prison" Regas Feraeos

IP Logged

The_Barnacle

Gold Member

Offline

Australian Politics

Posts: 6205
Melbourne
Gender: male

Re: after climate and water?
Reply #29 - Oct 20^th, 2019 at 10:59am

Ajax wrote on Oct 20^th, 2019 at 10:34am:

zoso wrote on May 5^th, 2007 at 1:39pm:

In 2003, the US was emitting 20 tonnes of CO2 per person, per year (Australia is something similar), China was emitting 2.7 tonnes per person per year... So please, lets be fair about this, China has 1/6th of the worlds population, they can be emitting a whole lot more CO2 than the US in total, and still the average chinese will be living quite the humble existence.

It is the first world countries that need to curb emissions, stop looking at everyone else and start looking at your own lifestyle.

Lead the way buddy get rid of

mobile phone
I-pad
Computer
No electricity in your house
No cars or trains trams or buses only push bikes
No aeroplanes
No tv or entertainment that uses power.
No plastic products
Everything has to be done manually.

Might as well live in a cave.

You wiling to show the way.

BTW Australian emits 1% of manmade greenhouse gases which is absorbed by Australia eco-systems..

Wake the f@rk up and stop listening to the oligarchy.

You do realise that zoso posted that 12 years ago.
I suspect he won't read your reply Grin

Back to top

The Right Wing only believe in free speech when they agree with what is being said.

IP Logged