As I live in the country with the world's worst energy policy, this is one of my pet peeves. Here in Germany, it's not not getting better - it's getting worse. A coalition of dreamy and self-serving Greens, and egotistical conservatives has de-tabooed burning wood for heating. Thus, in some rural places, the air is so unbreathable they are no longer suitable for winter hikes, and I can't imagine how it is to live there.
You have no idea. Germany has gone down the train. Indeed the world's worst energy policy (and I say that as someone who lives in the country with the world's second worst energy policy). Not even the trains are running on time in Germany anymore...
I would encourage you to check out the Electricity Maps app. It shows current electric power consumption and production in many countries, alongside the relative CO2 data. Germany regularly produces 10x the CO2 that for instance France does, for the same unit of electricity. Only old-fashioned coal-burners such as Poland fare worse.
Meanwhile, the German taxpayer is paying extortionate rates to producers of "green" electricity, i.e. folks with solar collectors on their roof. Last September alone: €2.6 bn. Follow the money!
2# Modern conservation methods however do significantly promote the risk- and ferocity of wild fires. Since the 70/80s conservation policies have been thought up, promoted and executed by sweet, urban, middle class planet conserving and even planet saving (so they think) sweethearts. They leave behind massive amounts of fuel on the forest floor. Which wasn't there a few decades ago. And even with that, wildfires are not growing in number or acreage.
But today we 'manage' nature to have it 'as natural' as possible...So when a fire happens you get a big whammy.
The plentyful and breathless headers like 'this wildfire was 35 x more likely because of climate change!' merely show you time and again that the BBC, The Guardian c.s. don't get statitics (academics in general suffer from that hence their generous throwing around of stats to 'reinforce' their case).
Rising CO2 does promote the greening of the planet and indeed it is. In locations where it matters (the Sahel etc), this is very welcome since it means more food on the table.
Note how fertilizers are also to be banned if the western urban maniacs have their way, while nitrogen already is a great danger apparently since it promotes plant growth. And that growth changes nature.
And it's change that scares the hell out of the environment & climate freaks.
Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety
First, this post is not about climate change. It is about air quality and the need for regulation to keep the air clean.
Second, I know that modern forest management goes back to managing the forest less because the monocultures and 'managed forests' were more likely to burn and the fires were bigger. But again, that's not what the post is about. It is about the need for regulation to keep our environment clean, not about climate change or other things.
If you don't think climate breakdown has contributed to the number and severity of wildfires in California and now the East coast you're a climate change denier, just admit it. And the post wasn't about that.
Only in the Guardian would this be considered a serious comment. If the climate really was breaking down COP number so and so would not have been just another sjamanistic exercise.
This is what the new head of IPCC science says about your climate breakdown:
Don't overstate 1.5 degrees C threat, new IPCC head says
The above post does connect wildfires to climate change in the last paragraph where it is argued that to decrease wildfire pollution impact, CO2 should be reduced. Unless the author - and you - actually believe that C02 is somehow a pollutant and harmful to our lungs like smog etc, one can only gather from that that the author wants to combat wildfires by limiting CO2 ie by limiing climate change.
Talking about real damage from real pollution: did you know millions of neat, educated and very reasonable western gentlemen and ladies promote cooking on wood and dung? Since these miiddle class moral beauties abhore fossil fuels FOR OTHERS and natural gas projects aren't supported anymore by the EU Investmnent bank and regular banks.
Quite a few more Indian women will die from lung cancer, heart disease etc because of neat people's climate panic.
A panic which for many seems to be a matter of good taste - not science, i meet plenty of high minded people but few (none actually) read climate studies. Climate has, just like vaccinations, immigration, one's lgbt stance etc rapidly become part of the moral Swiss knife. But in think it's rather blunt.
To round of; enjoy this lovely amusing and sarcastic post card (by a scientist no less, though HE does not claim to know The Truth) of the previous COP in Dubai where 80.000 (sic) networkers, pardon, planet saving powerpoint pros got together to exchange business cards:
As soon as I've finished this cigar I'll write to my MP saying we need to improve the quality of the air by reducing the particles we inhale by a huge amount.
How foolish of Republicans to denigrate the EPA. Ignore Climate Change for a moment. Small particulates are a public health hazard. In England there is concern about small particulate pollution by cars in London; which the Mayor seeks to reduce by charging cars to enter London - congestion charges.
Wild fires in Australia and parts of America threaten crops and housing. They will only get worse as temperatures and dry conditions increase.
There are ways in which environmental regulation in the US is helping making air quality worse! Apparently there are cases where the Californian forestry services spend so many years in the process of getting environmental approvals to do a prescribed burn, that the forests they are trying to protect with the burns are instead destroyed in natural wildfires :-)
Excellent article. Sadly the EPA is worse than the FCA - and that tells you how rotten it is. It needs to be strengthened...but the mad orange and his bozo cabinet will no doubt weaken it even more and allow polluters to have an environmental frat party...so sad.
As I live in the country with the world's worst energy policy, this is one of my pet peeves. Here in Germany, it's not not getting better - it's getting worse. A coalition of dreamy and self-serving Greens, and egotistical conservatives has de-tabooed burning wood for heating. Thus, in some rural places, the air is so unbreathable they are no longer suitable for winter hikes, and I can't imagine how it is to live there.
I'm shocked, I thought Germany was the gold standard...we're all doomed then.
You have no idea. Germany has gone down the train. Indeed the world's worst energy policy (and I say that as someone who lives in the country with the world's second worst energy policy). Not even the trains are running on time in Germany anymore...
I would encourage you to check out the Electricity Maps app. It shows current electric power consumption and production in many countries, alongside the relative CO2 data. Germany regularly produces 10x the CO2 that for instance France does, for the same unit of electricity. Only old-fashioned coal-burners such as Poland fare worse.
Meanwhile, the German taxpayer is paying extortionate rates to producers of "green" electricity, i.e. folks with solar collectors on their roof. Last September alone: €2.6 bn. Follow the money!
I no, what a start of the week. My dear darling Klement:
1# there is NO proven correlation between wildfires and climate.
IPCC AR6 chapter 12 Climate Change Information for Regional Impact and for Risk Assessment
(page 90 for extreme events)
https://www.ipcc.ch/report/ar6/wg1/downloads/report/IPCC_AR6_WGI_Chapter12.pdf
2# Modern conservation methods however do significantly promote the risk- and ferocity of wild fires. Since the 70/80s conservation policies have been thought up, promoted and executed by sweet, urban, middle class planet conserving and even planet saving (so they think) sweethearts. They leave behind massive amounts of fuel on the forest floor. Which wasn't there a few decades ago. And even with that, wildfires are not growing in number or acreage.
But today we 'manage' nature to have it 'as natural' as possible...So when a fire happens you get a big whammy.
The plentyful and breathless headers like 'this wildfire was 35 x more likely because of climate change!' merely show you time and again that the BBC, The Guardian c.s. don't get statitics (academics in general suffer from that hence their generous throwing around of stats to 'reinforce' their case).
Rising CO2 does promote the greening of the planet and indeed it is. In locations where it matters (the Sahel etc), this is very welcome since it means more food on the table.
Note how fertilizers are also to be banned if the western urban maniacs have their way, while nitrogen already is a great danger apparently since it promotes plant growth. And that growth changes nature.
And it's change that scares the hell out of the environment & climate freaks.
Environmental knowledge is inversely associated with climate change anxiety
https://bit.ly/3BJMwAZ
First, this post is not about climate change. It is about air quality and the need for regulation to keep the air clean.
Second, I know that modern forest management goes back to managing the forest less because the monocultures and 'managed forests' were more likely to burn and the fires were bigger. But again, that's not what the post is about. It is about the need for regulation to keep our environment clean, not about climate change or other things.
'this post is not about climate change'
It sure looks like it is since you argue not for realstic conservation methods but instead for reducing CO2. It doesn't add up.
I f you believe that CO2 itself is a pollutant i'd like to direct you that other poison oxygen.
If you don't think climate breakdown has contributed to the number and severity of wildfires in California and now the East coast you're a climate change denier, just admit it. And the post wasn't about that.
Only in the Guardian would this be considered a serious comment. If the climate really was breaking down COP number so and so would not have been just another sjamanistic exercise.
This is what the new head of IPCC science says about your climate breakdown:
Don't overstate 1.5 degrees C threat, new IPCC head says
https://bit.ly/3Qky3nA
The above post does connect wildfires to climate change in the last paragraph where it is argued that to decrease wildfire pollution impact, CO2 should be reduced. Unless the author - and you - actually believe that C02 is somehow a pollutant and harmful to our lungs like smog etc, one can only gather from that that the author wants to combat wildfires by limiting CO2 ie by limiing climate change.
Talking about real damage from real pollution: did you know millions of neat, educated and very reasonable western gentlemen and ladies promote cooking on wood and dung? Since these miiddle class moral beauties abhore fossil fuels FOR OTHERS and natural gas projects aren't supported anymore by the EU Investmnent bank and regular banks.
Quite a few more Indian women will die from lung cancer, heart disease etc because of neat people's climate panic.
A panic which for many seems to be a matter of good taste - not science, i meet plenty of high minded people but few (none actually) read climate studies. Climate has, just like vaccinations, immigration, one's lgbt stance etc rapidly become part of the moral Swiss knife. But in think it's rather blunt.
To round of; enjoy this lovely amusing and sarcastic post card (by a scientist no less, though HE does not claim to know The Truth) of the previous COP in Dubai where 80.000 (sic) networkers, pardon, planet saving powerpoint pros got together to exchange business cards:
COP-Out in Dubai
https://www.hungarianconservative.com/articles/culture_society/cop28_negotiations_dubai_political-economy_climate-crisis/
PS. You did notice that the UK (and Dutch) gov is (are) preparing its populace for large scale blackouts? Those lovely renewables...
As soon as I've finished this cigar I'll write to my MP saying we need to improve the quality of the air by reducing the particles we inhale by a huge amount.
How foolish of Republicans to denigrate the EPA. Ignore Climate Change for a moment. Small particulates are a public health hazard. In England there is concern about small particulate pollution by cars in London; which the Mayor seeks to reduce by charging cars to enter London - congestion charges.
Wild fires in Australia and parts of America threaten crops and housing. They will only get worse as temperatures and dry conditions increase.
There are ways in which environmental regulation in the US is helping making air quality worse! Apparently there are cases where the Californian forestry services spend so many years in the process of getting environmental approvals to do a prescribed burn, that the forests they are trying to protect with the burns are instead destroyed in natural wildfires :-)
Excellent article. Sadly the EPA is worse than the FCA - and that tells you how rotten it is. It needs to be strengthened...but the mad orange and his bozo cabinet will no doubt weaken it even more and allow polluters to have an environmental frat party...so sad.