Save Earth? 1) Cut Fossil Subsidies! 2) Research

COP 21, Conference Of Plutocrats 21?

The latest official scientific projections are more alarming than ever: a probability of at least a 4 Degrees Centigrades global rise  in temperature by 2100 is greater than 55% (it’s in Science Magazine, November 27, 2015).  And this dramatic prediction does not EVEN take into account the massive melting of the icecaps. I fully expect the dramatic melting of the icecaps, imminently, irreversibly, dramatically, and stupendously. Intuitively, just look at what is happening to Alpine, American, Andean glaciers: they are melting fast. That’s enabled by their smaller size… That means those with a larger size will melt just as well, it just takes more time to become obvious, that’s called inertia (I may write my details in an accompanying essay).

What is the “COP 21″? The Conference Of Plutocrats 21? What is a plutocrat? Someone with satanic powers, who believe full satanic powers in the few is the way to go. (Indeed, it’s the best way to go to hell. COP 21 in Paris is a circus to distract from the reality that (most) governments in the West which could do something do nothing, deliberately. Because of the entrenched powers that be, led by the USA (the Americans will tell you they don’t want to cut “growth”: pollute and get richer!)

The CO2 Emission EQUIVALENT Were 57 BILLION TONS Of Added CO2 In 2014

The CO2 Emission EQUIVALENT Were 57 BILLION TONS Of Added CO2 In 2014

[The image can be blown up, and read, with a suitable screen, it has more than 2 million pixels.]

The most striking feature is that we are adding 57 billion tons of Green House Gases at this point in CO2 EQUIVALENTS. So this does not just include CO2 emissions, but also NO, NO2 and CH4, plus chlorofluorocarbons. Some of these gases are 200 times, and sometimes thousands of times, more capable of the greenhouse effect than Carbon Dioxide.

Propagandists who are keen, or paid, to underestimate the Green House Gas crisis, are keen to quote only CO2 emissions, and even then not those C)2 emissions due to fires, deforestation, cement making. This way they can quote “CO2 emissions” as low as 9 Gigatons per year, instead of the REAL number, which is nearly SIX times greater.

The “infographics” above, agree with many of the points I made before. Some are well known scientific facts: CO2 will stay at high concentration for centuries (except if we find a way to extract it massively; we don’t have it now).  Some are more philosophical: MUCH MORE FUNDAMENTAL RESEARCH IS NEEDED.

There are two types of fundamental research: the applied type, say making (much) better batteries, or making controlled thermonuclear fusion viable as a new massive energy source. Then there is the really foundational fundamental type: that means supporting all and any fundamental science, from botany to astronomy: it is entangled with giving birth to new modes of thinking.

Democracy, even Direct Democracy, the real thing, has to capped by government (in real direct democracy, the legislative framework is from the People). Even Bill Gates recently recognized the importance of government. Government is always the ultimate actor, “private” efforts are just a kindergarten.

(The big high tech companies of Silicon Valley were always at the teat of government, ever since the 1930s, when Hitler gave the monopoly of computation to IBM in the Reich up to today’s Federal laxism towards the tech giants.)

One of the astounding fights at COP 21 in Paris has been that the rich countries want to allow GLOBAL warming up to two degrees. That’s obviously insane, as I explained more than six years ago. It looks more insane than ever. The reason? The warming in polar areas is several times this. Right now, we are around ONE degree Centigrade of global warming relative to level 280 of ppm CO2.  BUT, in the polar areas, it’s more like plus FIVE degrees Centigrades. So a global rise of TWO degrees C means plus TEN degrees C at the poles. So far, so good, but more than the area of Europe is ice grounded below sea level in the Arctic and Antarctica. It’s all going to melt, extremely soon, and suddenly. Consider this:

94% Of Heat Content Increase In Earth's Biosphere, Goes To The Ocean. And What Will Melt Antarctica? Ocean Sneaking Below

94% Of Heat Content Increase In Earth’s Biosphere, Goes To The Ocean. And What Will Melt Antarctica? Ocean Sneaking Below

Water, including the ocean, is denser at FOUR degrees Centigrades (roughly 39 Fahrenheit, well above the melting point of ice of 32F!) So it will sneak below ANTARCTICA’s ice shelves, icecaps and glaciers. In some places, it ALREADY sneaks 800 kilometers below (500 miles, to use Roman units).

When a few men and women rule over the fate of the biosphere, the astounding jewel of 5 billion years of evolution, they are automatically satanic.

Helping the Earth is simple: switch off all fossil fuels subsidies, 6,000 billion dollars of them, per year. Converting that into research would solve ALL problems within 30 years. Doing otherwise is just dust bowls in the eyes.

Instead, the COP 21 talks have been mostly about poor countries blackmailing the rich ones about 100 billion dollars (is that meant to be the price of the biosphere? Ten zeroes are missing…) That will solve nothing, quite the opposite, as it will reassure without a road to a real solution. Real solution can come only from radically new technology. We have a crisis way worse than Nazism onto us, and we are paying lip service to it.

Just as the Nazis were financed by plutocrats (many, if not most, early on, not German!) the International Monetary Fund has revealed the immense  of the global yearly total of fossil fuel subsidies — $5.3 trillion. This cludes the costs of the effects of energy use on people’s health (7 million dead a year from fossil fuel pollution!), the environment and climate change. That’s 7 percent of the global gross domestic product. The OCDE counted more than 800 tricks the rich countries use to support the fossil fuel industry.

Our great leaders pay lip service to “climate change” to look good, or, at least, less bad (yet leaders of the “V20”, the 20 Vulnerable nations presently disappearing under “climate change”, are sincere). Because our great leaders love themselves, and death, more than they love us, and life. And it cannot be otherwise, because of the way they got where they are, lying their way up, while having the greatest opinions of themselves, while anxious to please layers of plutocrats above them.

(Notice the analogy with the Jihadists’ systems of motivations, thus explaining in part, why it took so long to discover that there was a problem with the State of Islamism, and its Islamist state).

To end on a positive note: switching to cutting fossil fuel subsidies and making much more fundamental research could be started anytime, and by one, or a few countries, unilaterally. One could imagine President Donald Trump, suddenly feeling the heat, making an accord with Franco-Germania, and China, overnight. There is much more that can be done in the way of research and development.

An example is Whistler’s Hydrogen Fuel Cells bus fleet, twenty vehicles, each with 200,000 kilometers. They produce no pollution, just water. The program was scrapped, just because it’s a bit more expensive than (subsidized) diesel buses, and because the extremely satanic Harper ruled over Canada . Instead, such a program should be made mandatory all over the West, and diesel buses scrapped, all over the West. Just do it.

Patrice Ayme’



Tags: , , , , ,

8 Responses to “Save Earth? 1) Cut Fossil Subsidies! 2) Research”

  1. EugenR Says:

    Let us be honest, the existing political system of the western world gives very little chance to to implementation of drastic political measures needed to save the human civilization as we know it. The minimum measures needed immediately are;
    1. To close world wide most of the coal and petrol based electric generators, and to do it immediately in the developed US and Europe, while replacing it on the short term with generation based on natural gas. Such a solution could be done technically and economically in few years. But there is need to cope with the Oil and coal producing lobby. Do you see in the horizon any candidate for presidancy or to the US congress who is ready to support it?
    2. Life stock is the main producer of the methane, that has 10 times more greenhouse effect then the CO2, and its effect is relatively short living. To forbid meat eating out of life stock and enforce world vide vegetarianism, while developing artificial food substitutes.
    Do you see a politician stands up to call his people to give up eating hamburger or steak?
    3. To invest and develop public transformation, mainly fast trains and urban transportation, but also limit the usage of private cars in the city centers and on the highways with tendency to traffic jams concentration, which causes a very ineffective usage of energy.
    Do you see an US politician to stand up and support for example immediate huge investment in modern railway system? (Except Schwarzenegger. But even he wouldn’t dare to ask to change the transportation system in L.A. to more public transportation based and less private cars based transportation.) So why would the Chinese and the Indians agree to limit their usage of fossil fuels, unless due to the respect to the US military force.


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      You are right. The United Nations and the on-going COP process anticipate still that 26% of energy will come from COAL in 2050. That’s sheer insanity.
      Switching everybody to vegetarianism is not going to happen. But meat could be taxed much more, be it just a CARBON EQUIVALENT TAX (as you said, methane is up to 100 more greenhousy than CO2, short term, 25 times over a century). Meat can be replaced by farmed fish, insects…

      Nobody is going to ask people to eat grass, and live like half of India. That’s the beauty of a CARBON EQUIVALENT TAX: it will penalize automatically (no need to decry meat explicitly).

      I have talked about trains forever. But that’s why I ended with the Whistler Hydrogen Fuel Bus fleet: that worked extremely well. It could be generalized… Even to trains. Instead of diesel-electric trains, you would have hydrogen-electric trains, etc. I live (all too much) in one of the USA’s largest urban area, and we make massive usage of trains… For convenience (WIFI on board) and time (trains can go up to MORE THAN ten times faster, door to door. But it is clear that there is a government policy, in the USA to make trains NOT work. The satanic men holding the reins of power have to be thanked for that.

      The population is train to bleat and follow the leader, that’s why they have Christianism… 😉
      COP 22 is in Marrakesh, Morocco, next year! And it’s getting prepared already. Morocco is at more than 25% on sustainable energy already.


    • Gmax Says:

      China is the greatest CO2 contributor, like 20% above U.S. of A. India is number three. Right, it will end up with military force, and this is what the Syrian affair is a preview of.


      • EugenR Says:

        Syria is not even the prelude ton a Wagner length opera. Do you know that the Syrian war was a reaction to lack of water in the overpopulated north-eastern Syrian region? What will be the reaction of the population in the Parsian golf region when the temperatures will rise above 70 degrees?


        • Patrice Ayme Says:

          You sound, dear Eugen, quite a bit like Princes Charles, who I have criticized for this, on this site. The bottom line is that people in Syria had enough to leave with the dictator and his family of plutocrats, who are great Lords all over Europe (hence why Great Lord Charles accuse the physical climate, instead of the mental climate, the latter applying to him).

          Indeed the Earth will blow up. I don’t expect 70 degrees yet. A rise of just two degrees during heat waves will be devastating, especially as that will translate as plus ten C at the poles…


  2. Paul Handover Says:

    Brilliant essay, Patrice. The simplicity of the truth about the way to pull back from a very dangerous future is staggeringly clear: cut subsidies and tax the actions that harm us. Even your sentient turtle could work that one out, let alone Learning it from Dogs!


    • Patrice Ayme Says:

      Indeed, Paul, indeed: Learn From Turtles!
      (I was very touched by that turtle interaction, BTW. I went to Maui for family reasons, and could have imagined a friendship with a cetacean, as happened so long ago in Black Africa. But certainly not with a turtle! I think it was struck my struggle against the sea current, and found me amusing… So when I came back in the area, it behaved a bit like a friendly cat…)


What do you think? Please join the debate! The simplest questions are often the deepest!

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: