Climate taxes

[jtbo]

So our yearly car tax transforms to CO2 based in next March, this means heavy additional taxes to cars without any data from CO2 emissions from manufacturer. I know that 360 with B200K has quite low fuel consumption printed in manual, but information would be needed to come from manufacturer to be taken account, so now I would need to find someone from Volvo that could give data from CO2 emissions and official combined fuel consumption.

All this while I'm experiencing coldest October that I can remember.

Also finally it came out that tree ring data, which IPCC heavily relies in their models, is collected from one single tree, that is quite global indeed, there is lot of buzz currently, also IPCC itself has been forced to admit that last 11 years has been cooling trend and next 20-30 years that will continue.

Can't understand what on earth those idiots in power are thinking by still trying to milk dead cow, all data is against global warming now, almost daily discoveries of bad science is made and whole thing is about to collapse very soon.

Naturally our media won't say a word from these things, not even BBC has started to show some objectivity:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/8299079.stm

Well, I try to convince them that my little 360 is not bad CO2 maker, much better than a bus

[nomashedswede]

Also finally it came out that tree ring data, which IPCC heavily relies in their models, is collected from one single tree, that is quite global indeed, there is lot of buzz currently, also IPCC itself has been forced to admit that last 11 years has been cooling trend and next 20-30 years that will continue.

Can't understand what on earth those idiots in power are thinking by still trying to milk dead cow, all data is against global warming now, almost daily discoveries of bad science is made and whole thing is about to collapse very soon.
:

I agree that there is loads of conflicting evidence, but can the world risk the gamble ? Reports on both ice caps, now say they are melting at a far faster rate than anyone had envisaged, and only today some polar explorer has been on the news, saying that within ten years, he thinks that the north pole will be ocean, in the summer months ! There is a movement over here (and probably elsewhere too), called 10/10, or something very similar. They want everybody to reduce their personal energy consumption by 10% in 2010. As reasonable, and laudable as this sounds - if everyone in the "developed" world managed this, it wouldnt even make a dent in the increased emissions from India and China, that are happening year on year.
Don`t know what the answer is - or if there even is one, but at least we are doing our bit by keeping our cars running, and not falling for the government`s lie, that old cars should be scrapped !

[Ride_on]

Well we've had similar system in UK now, old cars have to put up basically. It not so much over a year, but is getting bigger, seems pointless and is mostly aimed at getting people to buy new cars to support the car industry not the environment. The average car produces as much CO2 during it life as the processes used to manufacture it, so keeping an old car prevents alot more CO2 than reducing consumption 20% or even 50%. Unfortunately it is economic activity that is damaging the planet and gov't always want to support this.

The GW dabate normally provokes a huge argument on many forums, but cars is a big one. Here's my opinion;

On the whole global warming thing there are 2 camps, unbiased scientists and polluting industry. Industry has plenty of money to get a few 'scientists' to pick holes in the IPCC data, and the old 'its not 100% sure so why should we risk profits' car is played, but there is no-one on the other side to pick holes for MMGW (man made global warming). The IPCC reports are a collection of ALLL scientists using what is considered to be only reliable data, they reject more data that supports it, than is against it and present a best case scenario. The truth I read, and tend to respect, from 'New Scientist' is that the evidence for MMGW is overwhelming, I certainly believe that they do not have any vested interests, whereas the other camp..well does. There are 1000s of reports that support it, but only a few against it. You get big magazine articles in the likes of the Economist 'Global warming not man made' or something, referring to 1 report and every business person I know is quoting this thinking it is representative. I also had a friend I hadn't seen for a while mention some backwater report about cloud formation and some weakness or other in IPCC data, he had read this scientific report, but I asked him if he understood it and he said 'No'. So I explained thats why I havn't read any. Unless you are prepared to read and understand the 1000's of reports you cannot form an educated opinion, you have to trust the best people for the job provided they have no vested interest, and that is the IPCC, thats what it was formed for and if it turns out some of the data was bollocks and they have turned around their opinion they will let us know. On the other hand what has actually happened is I see news reports every week reporting that many results of MMGW are actually much worse than predicted.

Many seem to think that MMGW is a gov't conspiracy, sure they will jump on the bandwagon and use it for their own agenda, but the IPCC is run by scientists, gov't ministers have no control over their output. Gov't is more likely to support industry and that is what they are doing IMO. Most scientist have given up on avoiding MMGW, they need more change more early and its not happening, their recommendations are now about how to limit it and cope with the changing weather patterns, increasing sea levels etc. Sure it may not seem any warmer where you are this year, its the average energy content of the surface/sea etc that's important and small changes make big differences.

[nomashedswede]

Unfortunately it is economic activity that is damaging the planet and gov't always want to support this.
.

I agree with almost everything you said, ride on, but the sentence above is the crux of the matter. The almost total domination of capitalism - which by definition demands MORE production and MORE consumption, to fuel the holy grail, CAPITAL GROWTH. Dial into this the overpopulation of the planet, and the emerging wealth in the developing nations, and, not to put to fine a point on it, we`re f***ed !
Still don`t know what the answer is, but somebody needs to work it out quick !

[jtbo]

Don't believe everything, ice caps are NOT melting, in fact they are increasing very rapidly, there are only very small minor parts where has been melting, one happened to be right where was active volcano under it, but it did made great headlines

Whole climate science is going wrong when scientist start to proof their point and not finding what data shows to them.

Sea surface temperatures, they claimed there is huge rise, but everything is normal if you look satellite data, however for example IPCC ignores satellite data, they use few cherry picked stations.
Same has been seen with sea level, if all sations are included there is no lot of sea rise, pick a few with highest rise and you get nice graphs to scare people.

There is no warming at the moment, global temperature is same as it was before industrial age and temperature is falling (well to be exact +0.074C and falling), generally accepted forecast is that 20-30 years of cooling is ahead, many scientists see this perioid as prelude to ice age.

CO2 is good for plants, why they use CO2 in greenhouseses at level of 1000ppm to get quadruple harvest compared to natural level? If more CO2 warms planet why temperature is decreasing while CO2 is rising and if we could prevent ice age by producing CO2 wouldn't it be reasonable to make sure ice age will not come?

Whole global warming is just money making machine for few and global economy crisis to the rest, if this goes on there will be no heavy industry left in our country, which means major unemployment, our economy is just starting to get hit by slowdown and it will take very long to recover by experts, there is no economical possibility to make silly things that has no meaning except they cost a lot.

Anyone has noticed how everything new is now more green and XX% better for enviroment, sales have ramped up like no time before, it is like Christmas to all needless stuff producers, print green or eco on it and it will sell, no matter what it is, even magnets to petrol tank to make your car pollute less (70's energy crisis and fuel saving hoaxes, anyone?), there is nothing green in this madness, it is just new way to get people consume even more, when people will change fully working durable stuff to new ones that last only few years, that is not eco in my opinion, that is plain good old capitalism pulling the strings.

BTW, Science is not as truth as some may think, for example it is common practise to use someones other's work as part of own work as it would be rather impossible to study and check everything, now when one credited study is false which is base of most studies, that makes those other studies needed to be re reviewed. Even peer review can fail, it has happened in case of Mann's tree ring study for example.
Also there has been several cases where scientists has lost his funding because results of study did not support proper policy, currently there starts to be lot more real studies that are not made to proof point, but find out how things really are, year ago such studies were impossible because of no funding.

IPCC reports for policy makers are made by politicians, not by scientists. Those reports are what goverments base their actions.

Which scientist I'm going to believe, those who are telling me to pay ton of money because global warming or those who say man can't cause global warming by CO2, or maybe those that say it is natural change, while here cold temp records has been broken in Summer, August, September and now in October we have had two weeks so cold that it such occure only 3 times in 100 years, but it has occured already 14 times alone in October?

They will learn, I hope before our country is in ruins, but eventually they will learn. In 70's there was huge puff in US about coming ice age when scientists did predicted world is going to new ice age, because of strong cooling of temperatures, now with more global world warming hysteria did conquer the world, but there is no warming anymore, there is cooling, we soon see new global cooling hysteria and nobody don't remember this warming hysteria. Damn, sit back, study and when we know how damn thing works, then make decisisons, there has been huge fast rises of CO2 in past, to levels far more human can tolerate, so it is not going to explode or anything like that, 0.385% of CO2 in athmosphere from that only few % is man made, it is not enough even if we stop all CO2 production including our breathing to make any difference, to current levels either, so what is the point?

There has been plans to collect CO2 and store it under ground, huge costs, also heavy risks as 100% CO2 is rather deadly if leaking to some city.
Also there has been plans of artificial trees that remove CO2, when they make level to 200ppm most current plants start to die.

There are no conspiracy, just politics, but if one is believing such conspiracies of oil companies paying to scientists or global warming has some bigger goals, how about keeping Africa poor and usable? If CO2 levels rise to double from current levels, it would mean that there would be no hunger in a world.

Ice ages began some 35 Million years ago, then there was no ice caps, climate was more even trough out the planet. Last warm perioid of time was Eem over 100 000 years ago, then there was very little of ice caps, rhinos in UK, generally world was filled with more life than it is now.

Also why nobody is never saying anything about deforestation and global warming, forests are number 1 CO2 consumers, how much of deforestation there has been since industrial age began? Now why nobody is not linking that to CO2 level rise? There are conspiracys

http://www.investors.com/NewsAndAnalysi ... ?id=508767

Big scandal that causes lot of re-reviews of papers as so many rely on this data:
http://wattsupwiththat.com/2009/10/01/r ... -rebuttal/

http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/e ... 868896.ece

http://www.worldclimatereport.com/index ... llite-era/

http://fourwinds10.com/siterun_data/env ... 1255539831

http://www.news.com.au/story/0,27574,25 ... 01,00.html

3 pages, base of IPCC views:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2009/09/29/yamal_scandal/

Swedish:
http://www.sr.se/cgi-bin/ekot/artikel.a ... el=3102122

"Scientific uncertainty does not prevent politicians from acting on climate change, shows a dissertation from Lund University.

- Politicians and officials generally find ways to get around the scientific uncertainty, at least according to the material I studied, "says political scientist Asa Knaggård who has examined the Swedish climate policy from 1975 until 2007"

http://naturalclimate.home.comcast.net/ ... tretas.pdf

Would be ton of more, (weekly comes new evidence against warming) but I guess there is already more than anyone likes to read and I still would need those consumption and CO2 numbers from Volvo, there is no power on earth that would turn our politician's heads around in this matter

[nomashedswede]

Crikey, jtbo - who`s rattled your cage ?
As I said before, I don`t know enough about all this, and am not as well read as you, on the subject ! However, subjectively, our climate in the UK has completely changed in my lifetime - we used to get, most years, four distinct seasons - winters with proper frosts, spring with some warmth and rain, summer with warmth and usually, a period of some decent heat (28c+), and autumn, when the leaves fell off the trees ! Now we get two seasons - Autumn and Spring, of roughly 6 months each, - and loads of rain. I know these climatic "blips" happen quite regularly, and maybe we are in the middle of one, but, as I said originally, with all the conflicting "evidence" and the possible Armeggedon consequences of us getting it wrong, can we afford the gamble ?

[trabitom99]

Even if you discount the whole CO2 and global warming (or not) argument (I've made my views on this pretty clear in previous posts, and don't really want to repeat the same stuff over again) - oil is still a finite resource. I'd rather it lasted a little longer, so we can all drive our combustion engine cars a little bit longer, and not have to drive those Gee Whizz thingys

Tom

[volvosneverdie]

We'll all be on hydrogen powered 300s soon enough.
Sure that technology is being 'surpressed' till the black stuff runs out.....

[nomashedswede]

Hydrogen powered, CVT 300 ...... now that`s a REAL Gee Whizz thingy !

[volvosneverdie]

Hydrogen powered, CVT 300 ...... now that`s a REAL Gee Whizz thingy !

Id buy one!

[jtbo]

Crikey, jtbo - who`s rattled your cage ?
As I said before, I don`t know enough about all this, and am not as well read as you, on the subject ! However, subjectively, our climate in the UK has completely changed in my lifetime - we used to get, most years, four distinct seasons - winters with proper frosts, spring with some warmth and rain, summer with warmth and usually, a period of some decent heat (28c+), and autumn, when the leaves fell off the trees ! Now we get two seasons - Autumn and Spring, of roughly 6 months each, - and loads of rain. I know these climatic "blips" happen quite regularly, and maybe we are in the middle of one, but, as I said originally, with all the conflicting "evidence" and the possible Armeggedon consequences of us getting it wrong, can we afford the gamble ?

Climate did change a lot during your grandfather's life time and his grandfather's life time, fact is that climate has been changing millions of years, without human, there are proof that ice age once came in 1 year, also after last ice age climate did change lot faster than now, so I would say that there are no such thing as gamble here, but what we can't afford is destroying of our economy with pushing hard with CO2 limits.

And if it is true that CO2 warms climate (which seem not to be case in light of recent evidence of CO2 rise and global cooling) then would you prefer bit of heat or ton of cold? I would say bit of heat which may help to keep next ice age in bareable limits, 2km of snow and ice above you is issue we are talking about here, I hope those who predict such (science chief of white house for example) are wrong, that is much greater concern.

Good thing for Tom is that synthetic fuel has already been invented, all that is needed would be more development to that so that it could be mass produced and we have good reason to save enviroment by driving old car instead of buying new one.

But we can't use synthetic fuel here, it would mean really heavy extra tax, same if you drive with waste veggie oil, several thousands in a year, also electric cars will get usage power tax, just same like diesel cars in our next tax renovation that supports greener cars (read, car dealerships, we don't have real car industry here Valmet automotive does not count as their products are not sold in here)....

VND, Fusion power is the future, just don't except it before 2050 they say, but it has been tested currently (ITER) and after that they have planned to make DEMO, quite optimistic naming I would say?

You know worst thing in this whole CO2 mess is that our rich countries move factories and such to poor countries, also solar panels are mainly made in China with coal powerplants producing energy to factories and so on, it is just throwing those CO2 emissions to other side of planet and pretending to be green.

I produce under 500l of carbage each year, I consume around 6000kwh energy for warming the house and water + computers and such, my french crap consumes less than 5 litres/100km when driven nicely, many have real difficulties to get to these levels and I'm not even trying, I'm just not living in consuming hysteria, even my phone is 7 years old. If I randomly drive with yanktank it drinks under 10 litres/100km and I drive under 5000km, but still our politicians are picking new taxes, I find that quite offensive, I actually would like to make as much of CO2 as possible as I must pay anyway.

They plan actually 80% reduction of CO2, that is not realistic by any means available in this world, we should even stop breathing for that and certainly there are no technology available that would work here to make that happen since our greenies are not allowing nuclear power and our greenies are unfortainely in handle of power, so this new car tax is just a start. Tax for 360 is probably increasing at least 300% unless I can find official quote of CO2 emissions.

Can you turbocharge hydrogen car?

[Ride_on]

Thats quite a bit of text jtbo looks familar to me, have you cut and pasted it from somewhere? Are you an environmental scientist and reviewed all the material the IPCC have, or have you just read this somewhere and believe it. My beliefs are opposing but for the same reason, however I do have good reason to trust my source. Your first link says 'investors.com', I rest my case.

Scientist want to charge you? - they don't, they tell gov't we need to produce less CO2. Gov't use it as an excuse to get more taxes to give us what we need/want (heathcare, education, bombs, banking bailouts etc). GW is not a gov't conspriacy, but as I said above it is a bandwagon, which they will happily jump on if it suits them. Gov't is not doing what the scientists are asking, it is too hard.

What ever you look at, wind power, solar panel etc there is no magic answer for GW, whatever we do to improve it generally involves producing more CO2 temporarily at least. Even Fusion power if ITER works (which is still being built-maybe you just got your tenses mixedup) will take decades to build reactor, notwithstanding the right materials, fuel from the moon etc. There are many answers for each thing, but the biggest problem is the sheer scale of change that is needed. It will take 20 years to replace all the current power stations if we start now and build 1 per week (of whatever type of replacement). If we don't start making hard decisions now it will be severely too late, already scientist are saying they have given up trying to prevent GW, it just about how bad it is going to get.

nomashedswede-Capitalism - may well be responsible, but I blame the banks mostly. It is the fiat current and interest bearing loans pyramid scheme that is driving the expansion, I think thats what needs fixed. We have been living far too well borrowing from the future and using up finite resources. In school economics I always remember being taught 'do not sell you assets to pay short term bills', unfortunately many people and gov'ts have been doing just that, now the credit has been used up, there are more people at the top of the pyramid than the bottom and its collapsing. Thats another story.

Uncertainty - Not sure why you have mentioned this, science is about uncertainly. Contrary to popular belief it does not establish facts, only different levels of certainty. If I explained how driving at 90mph on a residential road you were 90% likely to kill someone, you would tend not to drive at 90mpg, even if your skill allowed it. What level of confidence would it take for science to change your mind on GW?

[nomashedswede]

nomashedswede-Capitalism - may well be responsible, but I blame the banks mostly. It is the fiat current and interest bearing loans pyramid scheme that is driving the expansion, I think thats what needs fixed. We have been living far too well borrowing from the future and using up finite resources. In school economics I always remember being taught 'do not sell you assets to pay short term bills', unfortunately many people and gov'ts have been doing just that, now the credit has been used up, there are more people at the top of the pyramid than the bottom and its collapsing. Thats another story.

I agree that the recent past, and the present, has seen the developed world mortgage the planet - and, with no payment plan having been discussed ! Now the debt collector, in the guise of GW, is knocking on the door, and most of us are hiding behind the sofa.
I don`t agree with your pyramid analogy, though - I think it`s more hour glass shaped - the developed world in the top glass, and the rest in the bottom ! Unfortunately for them, they will pay the price first, indeed, according to some commentators, they have already started paying. The Armaggedon scenario - when they`ve gone, we will fall through !
Anybody got any contacts in Hollywood ? There`s at least a trilogy in this.

[volvosneverdie]

Anybody got any contacts in Hollywood ? There`s at least a trilogy in this.

I know Jimmy Nail.............................. close, but no cigar.

[jtbo]

I write my own texts, if I quote there is quote around it.

If there are constant lying, constant censorship in news how this year has been record cold in many places, braking over 100 years old records, I start to think that something is not right here.

When data shows that Ice is increasing, I don't believe such scientist that claims ice is decreasing, specially not when his source is one tiny part which makes less than 1% of total ice.

There are much wiser persons to disagree with current claims, there are more every day, even if one uses tiny bit of common sense it is clear that something is badly off in this warming thing.

There are few names:
http://www.americanthinker.com/blog/200 ... l_war.html

I guess he is not stupid?
http://www.fortliberty.org/australian-s ... e-age.html

I have even heard 1st hand from scientists why he did resign, because he was not allowed to make science, he was ordered to leave out temp data that would caused his study to look bad in current policy.

I will never believe that man made CO2 will cause warming, that just does not fit to data. There are only few instances that are doing heavy controlling of this climate stuff, in IPCC there were 2000 scientist on their lists hundreds have resigned because of how IPCC handles this subject, one is world's leading storm expert. There are such names on IPCC list that never had done any work to IPCC, they have just given right to use their names.

Even in Germany there are hundreds of scientists that disagree with IPCC, tens of thousands around the world, that against quite loose 2000 is in my opinion pretty clear signal, how ever EU is like old Soviet Union when it comes to big lines, they force everyone to follow same path, no matter if it would destroy some country's economy.

Whole geniusness is in making enough reports and studies so that nobody can't really read all of those.

There are lies, fish stories and statistics, you can get statistic show what ever you want them to show. Why temperature statistic are read only fraction of stations today compared before this madness did start? Why those few stations have been found to be on rooftops getting heated by roof or near exhaust fans of building? Latest I did read was in Switzerland, where relocating station caused temprature to drop 0,5C degrees, that is quite a lot when we are talking from 0,4C rise in 160 years, which happens to be 0,074C this currently because of 11 years cooling trend, while CO2 has gone up.

Why IPCC was very strongly stating it's views in AR3, but in current report it is more cautious? They have found out problems in their papers.

Problem is bandwagon, scientists are humans too, it is easy to search proof for certain view (bad science) instead of studying neutrally, now many scientists have put out strong statements, they have placed their careers in jeopardy, it is very difficult to admit in that position how one made errors, that causes delays in settling this matter to strong base.

Also in last 2 years there has been so many new discoveries, that whole warming must be reconsidered.

No need to believe me, maybe this guy knows better than any of us?

Don J. Easterbrook is Professor Emeritus of Geology at Western Washington University. Bellingham, WA.

http://www.globalresearch.ca/index.php? ... &aid=10783

What comes to ITER, I did read about it from Wikipedia, that technology is longshot as I wrote, but it will come, probably not my lifetime, but someday.

I think same goes with this warming stuff, we should first get to know even how our damn climate works, before jumping to conclusions and make s*it from people's lifes and global economy, just this year have been discovered how sun and solar wind affects to our climate and clouds, there is too many black holes, when one reads IPCC's latest report you can clearly see that there are lot of maybe's and perhapses, there just is not enough data.
All data from history shows how earth was not never ever destroyed by CO2, stones from sky caused few end of worlds for sure, so why there would be any of such now?
In Turkey, there were lot different climate in old times, now very dry and cold areas where before were warm and large forests, then temperature was higher. You can find all these kind of things from geology and history, but when it comes to climate it is all of sudden very dangerous if climate warms up.

Also one important thing, if it keeps getting cooler at this rate, we won't have soon summer at all, this summer was really short in where I live, only few warm days, but no +25C, also freezing temps did come very early, when looking temp statistics winter has already begun, it is earliest since 1800's, so I will not buy if someone tries to claim that warming has not stopped, also IPCC climate modellers are saying that there will be 20-30 years of cooling, I think that I read that from NASA too, so this all makes old climate models obsolete, those that claims 5 to 6 degrees of warming by 2050, same way as it has been before, always overshooting those models.

But I just would like to get CO2 data for my 360 so that I could get cheaper tax, those politicians are greedy bastards that would like me to buy some Prius which has so much problematic material that I would need to drive over 400 000km before it starts even to be more eco friendly and that does not last such long before those not so eco friendly parts would need replacement, it is just silly, imo.