| fjallsbak | Føroyar og Kyoto |
|
|  |
| | Familiar |  |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Tórshavn | | Joined: 02.07.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 08:30 |
|
Okkara egni í“li Breckmann um Kyoto
http://www.nordlysid.fo/main.cfm?article=8937
Scary
edit: title to reflect the thread in searches.
|
|
Edited by Norlander on 20-10-2007 20:12 |
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
|  |
| | General |  |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 10:08 |
|
What's so scary?
I happen to agree with much (Not everything) that he's saying there.
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
|
|
|
| Grizlas | RE: Kyoto |
|
|  |
| | General | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Denmark | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 11:22 |
|
í“li Breckmann.....tímir tú loooooooongir?
Eg kann bara vóna, at tað eru tey fægstu sum lurta eftir tóma rhetorikkinum. í allari hasari smøruni leggur hann ikki eitt einasta eitt fakta á borið. Endurtekur bara, at hann ikki trýr uppá nakaðsumhelst. Ozonlagið er bara nakað sum onkur óndur socialdemokratur hevur funnið uppá fyri at stjala pengar frá tí erliga kapitalistiska borgaranum.
Thomsen, ja tað er scary at tú og onnur stemma uppá handan mannin.
|
You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing? |
|
|
|
|
| Celdar | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | Initiate |  |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Joined: 02.08.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 11:47 | |
|
Am I sick if I thought that was amusing? 
|
|
|
|
|
|
| OKJones | RE: Kyoto |
|
|  |
| | Commander | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Argir | | Joined: 12.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 12:53 |
|
No probably not, í“li is amusing in a sick kinda way
|
Why would I want to end every post the same way? |
|
|
|
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 12:58 |
|
Well, then enlighten the ignorant few!
What are we paying for in those quotas?
Where does the money go?
What is that money thereafter used for?
What is the extraordinary costs to our society gonna be, when we need more power, and the local environmentalists ban all access to water, so the water-powered power-plants can't be expanded?
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
|
|
|
|
| Grizlas | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Denmark | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 13:57 |
|
Why do you always plead ignorance? you know perfectly well the answer to those questions. You know what we are paying for in those quotas, where the money goes? it goes to developing countries who aren't polluting as much as we are, where it is used to develop those countries. The last question is....absurd - even by your standards.
|
You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing? |
|
|
|
|
| Norlander | RE: Kyoto |
|
|  |
| | Field Marshal | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Copenhagen | | Joined: 09.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 15:56 |
|
What are we paying for in those quotas?
Currently the European Climate Exchange lists it at €23 per tonne.
Where does the money go?
Hopefully to me in a few years
What is that money thereafter used for?
Sex, Drugs and Rock & Roll
What is the extraordinary costs to our society gonna be, when we need more power, and the local environmentalists ban all access to water, so the water-powered power-plants can't be expanded?
I'll fix that as well...
|
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.
- John Kenneth Galbraith |
|
|
|
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 16:36 |
|
Why do you always plead ignorance? you know perfectly well the answer to those questions. You know what we are paying for in those quotas, where the money goes? it goes to developing countries who aren't polluting as much as we are, where it is used to develop those countries. The last question is....absurd - even by your standards.
I don't know where the money goes, and if you examine your own answer, you'll find the answer more absurd than the question.
Here goes. If we are to be fined 172,50 DKr. pr. Tonne of polutant aerosols, and you're perfectly satisfied that this amount (minus the inevitable handling fees by the supervisors of the Kyoto accord) is given to developing countries who aren't polluting as much as we are, where it is used to develop those countries , instead of us perhaps using the same money to develop our economic apparatus and power supply to become more efficient and less polluting, then you're helping to support an inevitable cycle of the rich nations paying fines to the poor nations and disregarding the stagnation (but not necessarily decline) in pollution caused by the rich nations.
The last question I posed, is not absurd.
Our local electricity is mostly given to us by huge diesel turbines, that pump out vast quantities of pollutant aerosols while consuming vast quantities of fossil fuels. A very small part of our local electricity is provided by water-driven powerplants and an even smaller part is given by wind-turbines.
Every time S.E.V. has had plans to expand the water reservoirs so as to increase the "cleaner" supply to us, they have been met by environmental rallies and screams from people saying that they are about to destroy our beloved nature. (Environmentalists: Make up your minds!)
If we are to become more efficient and develop our "clean" power-supply, then we will inevitably have to pay a price somehow.
I would not mind a uninhabited (except by sheap) valley, or two, to become submerged, and thereby possibly reducing our diesel usage rather significantly.
When Norlander has fullfilled his dream product, whe can empty the reservoirs again, and start up the old power-plants again.
Until then, if we are to be fined for using fossil fuels to provide power to the country, and can't expand our water-plants, then how and what can we do, and how much extra is it gonna cost to create other sustainable sources of electricity?
The dreaming ideas of willful people does not help us here and now, and if we're to pay fines as well, then it is going to make it even more difficult and give us less money, to reduce our pollutant output in significant amounts.
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
Edited by Jogvanth on 17-10-2007 16:38 |
|
|
| Grizlas | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Denmark | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 17-10-2007 19:32 |
|
See, you know the answers. Maybe next time, we can skip the part where you pretend to not know anything, and just move on to your arguments.
I'll agree with you though, that Koyoto has a whole bunch of problems and the quota system isn't worth a damn. However, it beats the hell out of doing nothing at all - which you seem to be advocating.
Committing to Koyoto sends an important signal, and it's a signal that we need to be sending. I'm willing to pay good money for letting the world know that we're ready to do our part to help solve the problem of global warming - whatever the eventual solution might be.
|
You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing? |
|
|
|
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 18-10-2007 09:50 |
|
See, you know the answers. Maybe next time, we can skip the part where you pretend to not know anything, and just move on to your arguments.
I did not know the answers. You answered them. I based my arguments on your answers.
it beats the hell out of doing nothing at all - which you seem to be advocating
I'm not advocating doing nothing.
I'm advocating, there are better ways to do it, than jumping on the "The world is coming to an end" bandwagon.
I'm advocating, that if the purpose of the fines, is to stem local pollution, then the money is better spent here, than giving it away, and having less money left to work on the problem.
I'm advocating, that if we really want to help developing countries, then there are better and more effective ways of helping, besides giving them the leftovers from our pollution-based fines.
Committing to Koyoto sends an important signal, and it's a signal that we need to be sending
What signal? That we want to be considered "green", and pay the pre-mentioned fines with a big smile on our faces stating "We're helping to preserve life, while helping the poor"?
And more so, exactly WHY do we need to send it?
I personaly think it's idiotic. The goals of Kyoto are OK. Not more, not less.
If we really want to make a difference, then we should say, that ALL industrial nations HAVE to pay set fine pr. tonne of pollutant total (screw the US, make them pay anyways!). Then put this money to work, and I'm talking the full monetary amount here, to create more efficient and less polluting ways to sustain ourselves and our way of life.
That means, make our power cleaner, more efficient and ultimately, completely non polluting.
Then GIVE these solutions to the developing countries (not sell).
If you're willing to pay for the signals of Kyoto, then go ahead. I have a big problem with it. I think its pure bureacracy and nothing else. An organization created to serve itself.
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
Edited by Jogvanth on 18-10-2007 11:56 |
|
|
| Celdar | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | Initiate | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Joined: 02.08.06 | | Posted on 18-10-2007 11:41 | |
|
Being a forum troll, I just wanted to make a few small observations...
1: Our disel generation plants are piston reciprocating engines - not turbines.
2: The argument that the environmentalists have against expanding the hydro capcity in the Faroes is not so much the submerging of a few valleys, it is more centered on the necesarry draining/sucking/gathering of water to fill said vallays. The norther part of Eysturoy hardly has a river left to speak of, and expanding this further south is said to have significant effects on the life in fjords and such.
3: I have considered the breaking of carbon quotas more as a levy tax on corporations and companies - and that he intended trade in quotas would occur between clean and dirty companies, not between international states. But I have not read much about Kyoto, so pardon me if I am way wide of the mark.
I do agree with Breckman on one point. I think the tone of this discussion as a whole has turned bad. It has come to the point where it is socially unacceptable to question the validity or reasonability of "some" claims of the Global Warming lobby, and if you do so you are not taken on in a reasonable discussion but shot down with whatever labels the opponent feels are suitably derisory.
Breckmans essay is obviously inflamatory because that is how he does things... always has been.
This becaome longer than I intended... better stop
|
|
|
|
|
|
| Grizlas | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Denmark | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 18-10-2007 18:37 |
|
@thomsen:
Ok, so it breaks down like this: A large coalition of nations are banding together in an unpresidented effort to combat global warming, but because you want to do it in a different way, you are against taking part at all. That - to me - means advocating doing nothing, since you cannot realistically expect to get the nations of the world to unite behind the proposal of Jogvan Thomsen. Kyoto is what we got. Not joining up because you have some small problem with it, is either insincere or plain wishful thinking. Signal? yeah, it's called foreign policy - look it up.
@Celdar
I agree to some degree, that being in opposition to global warming is becoming increasingly difficult. Still, I don't think it's a problem for the peer review process...not yet anyways.
|
You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing? |
Edited by Grizlas on 18-10-2007 18:38 |
|
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 18-10-2007 20:36 |
|
Signal? yeah, it's called foreign policy - look it up
And what particular foreign policy are you refering to?
I still call it "jumping on the bandwagon". I do not see why we have to accept being treathened into a pact, that we were not allowed to be part of creating, nor discuss terms about. In accepting the Kyoto accord as it is "asked" of us now, I say, that we're accepting foreign rule at home. We are allowing foreign nationals, diplomats and "experts" to dictate terms to our country, that we hereafter have no say about, nor any posibillity to discuss terms about. Why not just join the EU, and turn over all national and international affairs to people living several thousand kilometres away!
I'm saying, let us reduce our pollution at our own pace, on our own terms and in our own way. Why must we do what everyone else is doing? Has our foreign policy suddently become "Let's just go with the flow" like lemmings?
@Grizlas: Sofar all responses I've got from you sound like an adolescent "If you don't want to be like the rest, then you're just stupid!"
I've not seen one factual argument from you in this debate, only emotional.
Only factual response came from Celdar on the emptying of the rivers.
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
Edited by Jogvanth on 19-10-2007 08:48 |
|
|
| Norlander | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | Field Marshal | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Copenhagen | | Joined: 09.06.06 | | Posted on 19-10-2007 08:51 |
|
jogvanth wrote:
Only factual response came from Celdar on the emptying of the rivers.
I protest! My response earlier contained nothing but facts!
|
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.
- John Kenneth Galbraith |
|
|
|
|
| Norlander | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | Field Marshal | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Copenhagen | | Joined: 09.06.06 | | Posted on 19-10-2007 08:53 |
|
jogvanth wrote:
Only factual response came from Celdar on the emptying of the rivers.
I protest! My response earlier contained nothing but facts!
On Foreign policy. When you want to market yourself as a crystal clean, green hills, blue skies and deep oceans alternative (as the Faroes does in tourism and fish exports), you can't be one of the biggest pollutants and against environmental treaties.
|
The conventional view serves to protect us from the painful job of thinking.
- John Kenneth Galbraith |
|
|
|
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 19-10-2007 10:01 |
|
I'm not saying we HAVE to be against environmental treaties.
I'm saying, Kyoto (As it has been pushed down upon us) is cobswallop.
I'm having problems with the fact, that we are not asked if we want to join.
We are being told "Join, or else....!".
I'm saying, let's do better than Kyoto, and faster, but on our own terms!
Then we can brand ourselves as "Better than any Kyoto nation".
I've read in the newspapers, that our local environmetalist spokespersons are saying that we need wery little effort on our part to meet the demands in Kyoto. Then why not do better, and to hell with Kyoto?
The news just had an interview with the danish environmetal minister, who stated, that it is very important for the Faroes to bind itself with the Kyoto accord, or the danish community would have to pay for it.
Once more, we have heard our masters call. Do we answer it?
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
Edited by Jogvanth on 19-10-2007 11:49 |
|
|
| Grizlas | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Denmark | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 19-10-2007 16:07 |
|
Here's what i'm thinking:
First, we pay something like 43 million over 20 something years (peanuts) for joining up with Kyoto. That will show our neighbours - upon whom we are reliant - that we are concerned for the environment and ready to play ball. In monetary terms I'd value such a signal much more than 43 million. Joining koyoto will also show "our masters" that we dont want or need them to pay our bills, which I think is important since I envision this country becomming independent someday.
Once we have done that, we should - as you say - move beyond kyoto and make the Faroes almost completely reliant on renewable energy sources while having reduced our carbon emmissions even further. Hopefully, Norlander's project will take off and we'll be on the forefront of biofuel production.
|
You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing? |
|
|
|
|
| Jogvanth | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Klikan
| | Location: Hoyvík | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 19-10-2007 16:32 |
|
We have to pay a fee for signing Kyoto????????
I would have them pay us for joining.
As the danes have presented it to us, it looks like they have been forced a quota by the UN, and don't want to pay the full price, so they try to pawn some of the cost of on us!
I too want this country to become independent someday. For that to even be a slight possibility, we have to keep as much money as possible flowing in to the country, and reduce the amounts of money going out of the country to absolute minimums. I would rather have us spend 43 mill. on advertising than a footnote in Kyoto. We're not big enough to be given notice if we join, but I understand the critics about the "bad" publicity of not joining. Hence my statement of "money down the drain", so to speak.
|
No decision is so fine as to not bind us to its consequences.
No consequence is so unexpected as to absolve us of our decisions.
Not even death.
-R. Scott Bakker. 'The Prince of Nothing' |
|
|
|
|
| Grizlas | RE: Kyoto |
|
| |
| | General | |
| | Group: Administrator,
Klikan,
Regulars,
Outsiders
| | Location: Denmark | | Joined: 08.06.06 | | Posted on 19-10-2007 16:34 |
|
@Grizlas: Sofar all responses I've got from you sound like an adolescent "If you don't want to be like the rest, then you're just stupid!"
I've not seen one factual argument from you in this debate, only emotional.
eh?
first off, since when do you have standards about arguments? and secondly, I dont think my arguments have been emotional. The only emotional guy in this debate is í“li - the guy you're backing. To say no to kyoto because you feel it has been forced upon you is exactly the kind of adolescent argumentation I've come to expect from you. Just because somebody forces something upon you, doesnt mean you automatically have to refuse it like a teenage rebel. Kyoto is the environmental treaty on the table. Saying no to Kyoto is very bad foreign policy for any nation interesting in cooperating with other nation states - something that is essential for the Faroes. I think this is a pretty straight forward factual argument. Let me sum it up for you:
saying no kyoto: severe penalties for faroese industry and general image. Probably ammounting to hundreds of millions in lost product sales, venture capital, business relocation etc. etc. over the next 20 years.
saying yes: no big deal. 43 million - peanuts.
EDIT: 43 million was a number Gilli came up with after having looked at some numbers and I think it sounds about right. 43 million is what we'd have to pay in CO2 quotas for ouor excess CO2 emmission until we reduce it sufficiently. It is something we're more than able to pay for - unlike some of our neighbours, who will have a real problem when the time comes to pay up. Having the faroes handling their Kyoto commitments in stride while Denmark fails to live up to its end, is the kind of thing that really could get us our independence someday.
We cannot afford to say no to Kyoto. Wether you can come up with something better is completely beside the point and shouldn't have any bearing on the question of Kyoto.
|
You want to tempt the wrath of the whatever from high atop the thing? |
Edited by Grizlas on 19-10-2007 16:44 |
|
|
