“In the latest ‘Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change 5th Assessment Report’ (IPCC AR5), there have been published a selection of ‘Representative Concentration Pathways’ (RCP’s).
Dr Matt Watson, from the school of earth Sciences at the University of Bristol (UK), made this point strongly at a recent meeting at the Royal Society in London:“Why are we doing this? Why are we doing this research? This is why, this is the latest projections from the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, and the alarming thing is that these two scenarios [RCP 2.6 and RCP 4.5] both include negative emissions technology. So, there is geoengineering, of the flavour of carbon dioxide removal, in the best case scenarios.”
“The very, very alarming thing for us is that we are on this path here, that is RCP 8.5. We are slap bang on this trajectory and this puts us in a very different place in our children’s lifetime.”
All hope of maintaining a liveable planet has been gambled on negative emissions technology that simply does not exist. In fact it is “Fantasy Technology” that they hope will be invented sometime in the future.
Chair of the IPCC Dr Rajendra Pachauri
“If there’s no action before 2012, that’s too late. What we do in the next two to three years will determine our future. This is the defining moment”
Valencia Spain, Nov 17, 2007.
U.N. Report Describes Risks of Inaction on Climate Change – The New York Times.
Nick Breeze recorded this seminal presentation that is a must watch if you want to understand the horrendous gamble that the dominant culture has taken with all complex life on the planet. Watch the video at the following link; Survivable IPCC projections based on science fiction.
More posts by Nick Breeze: http://envisionation.co.uk
We have crossed a multitude of “Tipping Points” and the IPCC has gambled everything on little more than science fiction.
I'm an anti-imperialist, environmental activist and blue ocean sailor, who is passionate about the earth and all it's inhabitants without favour. Brace for imminent impact as we bare witness to the non-linear unraveling of the biosphere and habitability disappearing for most if not all complex life on the only habitable planet we know of. To quote President Niinistö in North Russia: ‘If We Lose the Arctic, We Lose the World’. Folks we have lost the Arctic.
Kevin Hester 
LikeLike
Still ‘based on science fiction’ thread, eh? Sure is a lot of that going around!
Had to laugh at the STOP SHITTING ON THE FLOOR and all the cute pictures of our mad right wing asswipe billionaires popping up.
Well, of course. The status quo cannot be disturbed don’t you know?
WMO Climate Report Shows 8 Hottest Years on Record With Global Targets Nearly ‘Out of Reach’
https://www.commondreams.org/news/2022/11/06/wmo-climate-report-shows-8-hottest-years-record-global-targets-nearly-out-reach
__
You’ll notice that the WHO are still repeating their ‘climate targets may not be achievable’ as if those ever really were but, again, have to keep people believing in that status quo. Otherwise we’ll have a disaster, yes? Hmmmm…
__
Speaking of status quo, what would happen in New Zealand if armed mask-wearing vigilantes guarded public mail-in ballot boxes, filmed people dropping off ballots, took pictures of their license plates, and also followed some of them home? Fascism, dude, it’s here and now.
sealintheSelkirks
LikeLiked by 1 person
This is a masterpiece of connecting the obvious and more subtle dots on what is brilliantly described in the title.
The Pie in the Sky delusion of gambling on future technology reminds me of the lunacy of the IPCC’s Representative Concentration Pathways’ (RCP’s) all factoring in Carbon Capture and Storage at scale which is as we all know fantasy technology.
https://www.manhattancontrarian.com/blog/2022-12-1-the-manhattan-contrarian-energy-storage-paper-has-arrived
LikeLike
LikeLike
Courtesy of my mate Erik Michaels:
“Kevin and I have been pointing out for years the big con of carbon removal technologies such as BECCS, DAC, and other forms of CDR (carbon dioxide removal). I hate to sound like a broken record, but these ideas are absolutely every bit as ridiculous as non-renewable “renewable” energy devices. They don’t solve anything and only make the existing predicaments WORSE.
Quote: “In 2022, the world emitted 40.5 billion tonnes of CO2 (P. Friedlingstein et al. Earth Syst. Sci. Data 14, 4811–4900; 2022). At that rate, for every year of operation at its full potential, each hub would take the atmosphere back in time by almost 13 minutes, but in the time it took to remove those 13 minutes of CO2, the world would have spewed another full year of CO2 into the atmosphere.
Meanwhile, if everyone on Earth planted a tree — 8 billion trees — it would take us back in time by about 43 hours every year, once the trees had matured.
The time-machine analogy reveals just how futile CDR currently is.
We have to shift the narrative as a matter of urgency. Money is going to flood into climate solutions over the next few years, and we need to direct it well. We must stop talking about deploying CDR as a solution today, when emissions remain high — as if it somehow replaces radical, immediate emission cuts.”
https://www.nature.com/articles/d41586-023-00953-x?fbclid=IwAR3H8Y_nRFR6eAk11BGSwolr5kqLYPNz07iFajlEXbC5PZTKinW_HCr0-4U
LikeLike
LikeLike
As I have previously pointed out, the IPCC have factored Carbon Capture and Storage, at scale, into their Representative Concentration Pathways, even though that technology doesn’t exist. The key words are “At Scale”.
The IPCC gambled the entire ecosystem on fantasy technology, with the delusion that someone would overcome the dilemma sometime in the future. Classic capitalist speculation, mostly with taxpayers’ funds.
Despite what this latest boondoggle might try to imply, and the need to ignore the laws of thermodynamics, this technology is still in the development stage and no engineer I know of believes it will be scalable, in time to make a significant contribution. It’s the Helium and Fission nonsense regurgitated.
Have a look at the embedded photo of the enormity of the plant and think about all the mining (calcium oxide powder will need to be mined somewhere, plus all the steel and concrete for construction) and transport required to manufacture, design, assemble and more importantly, how much energy is required to operate the plant. We are conveniently never given that figure because it would give the game away.
What this plant represents to me is a successful pitch for development finance from governments desperate to maintain “Business as usual”. The objective is never the preservation of the ecosystem, it’s the continuation of BAU.
Someone creates a shiny Power Point presentation that looks wonderful, if you avoid the detail, and some government official, looking for a directorship when he (it’s always a ‘he’) leaves government, approves the venture capital and boom we’re underway. Boondoggle underway, directorship locked in.
All these scams are built around the vain attempt to make the unsustainable sustainable!
When aliens arrive on our baron rock, sometime in the future, and see all these monuments of futility and they will ask “What were they thinking”? the answer is clear, “More, More, More.”
That reminds me of a quote Guy taught me years ago from John Kenneth Galbraith “People of privilege will risk their complete destruction rather that relinquish any material portion of that privilege”.
https://guymcpherson.substack.com/p/science-snippets-disaster-awaits
LikeLike
LikeLike
LikeLike