Yasi - Be scared, very scared of this storm

[BlackCat]

I do know whether the globe is warming or not warming.

Your pov is totally garbagelled and therefore invalid - You are nothing but an oilpaid nutcase

Sorry, couldn't resist

That said I would suggest that common sense dictates that there are certain actions we do need to take regardless of whether or not one believes the globe is warming due to human actions. These actions include, but are not limited to:
- cutting pollution (reduce acid rain, smog etc)
- reducing our dependence on fossil fuels (we must run out eventually)
- researching "clean" energy sources (to cut pollution and dependence on fossil fuels)
- management and preservation of eco-systems
- not dumping toxic waste or other rubbish in waterways or otherwise scattering it about the landscape

Quite agree

[Egbert]

Your pov is totally garbagelled and therefore invalid - You are nothing but an oilpaid nutcase
Sorry, couldn't resist

"I do not know" is a valid point of view.

If I was an oilpaid nutcase I would say there is no such thing as global warming.
Danish nutcase.

[BlackCat]

"I do not know" is a valid point of view.

If I was an oilpaid nutcase I would say there is no such thing as global warming.
Danish nutcase.

Yeah, but you said :

I do know whether the globe is warming or not warming.

Can't find more than one not in that .

[Egbert]

Can't find more than one not in that .

You can now that I have edited it.
Thanks

[BlackCat]

No problem

Btw, have you any status on that toxic waste you aussies are sending to us ? Some idiots seems to want to stop it.

[Egbert]

Denmark has refused to accept the toxic waste.

http://www.theaustralian.com.au/national-affairs/foreign-affairs/denmark-cancels-shipments-of-toxic-chemical-waste-from-australia/story-fn59nm2j-1225975796066

Denmark cancels shipments of toxic chemical waste from Australia
• Joe Kelly
• From: The Australian
• December 24, 2010 10:38AM
THE Gillard government has branded as "unfortunate" Denmark's decision to cancel imports of hazardous chemical waste from Australia for disposal.
Approved in August but postponed by Denmark earlier this month, shipments of 6100 tonnes of highly toxic hexachlorobenzene (HCB) have now been cancelled by the Danish government following political opposition.
“It is unthinkable that we can take this waste in view of the way the situation has developed and the significant opposition, as much political as popular,” said Denmark's Environment Minister Karen Ellemann.
Environmentalists were outraged when the Gillard government announced in June a first shipment of toxic waste, currently stored in Sydney, would be sent to a facility at Nyborg in Denmark because Australia cannot safely dispose of the hazardous material itself.
The Australian explosives company Orica Ltd has been storing HCB waste at its Botany Bay facility in Sydney for years as it seeks a way of safe disposal.
"We are obviously disappointed with the decision and we will review all of our options for the continuing safe storage and sound environmental destruction of the HCB waste," said a spokesman for Orica.
HCB, a by-product of solvents made between 1964 and 1991, is considered a human carcinogen and is globally banned.
Environment Minister Tony Burke said today it was unfortunate Denmark had decided not to accept the planned shipments, the first of which was originally due to arrive in Denmark next month. A second shipment was planned next year.
Mr Burke, who spoke to Ms Ellemann on Wednesday night, said the decision was not because of environmental problems but the result of political opposition.
“I have had a discussion with my Danish colleague, Mrs Karen Ellemann,” Mr Burke said in a statement.
“She informed me about the political situation and debate in Denmark, which regrettably has led to the political conclusion that the shipment should not proceed,” he said.
“Mrs Ellemann assured me that all required environmental and safety assessments have been conducted to the satisfaction of the Danish authorities, and that the Danish conclusion therefore by nature is political,” he added.
Mr Burke said it was agreed that the decision demonstrated the need for improving international cooperation on the handling and disposal of persistent organic pollutants (POP).
“We therefore also agreed that we would explore options for a Danish/Australian joint global initiative in the context of the Stockholm and Basel conventions, to find international solutions to problems related to stockpiles of POP-substances.”
Mr Burke said he told Mrs Ellemann Australia would respect Denmark's decision, and Orica would be informed about the outcome of the discussions.
The shipment had been approved by both the Australian and Danish governments under the Basel Convention on the Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Waste.
In June, Mrs Ellemann said her country had to accept the waste because of treaty obligations.
Danish company Kommunekemi won a lucrative contract to ship and treat the waste.
Denmark “has the obligation to help other countries when they are confronted with an unsolvable problem,” she said at the time.
Danish authorities required the waste to be transported in double-hulled ships, with each container equipped with a GPS to allow its movements to be tracked.
But Greenpeace protested against the shipment and environmentalists argue that Australia should deal with the waste at home, and that shipping highly dangerous chemicals around the world poses an unacceptable risk.
Greenpeace spokesman James Lorenz said following Denmark's decision, it was now time for Orica to accept its responsibilities and get rid of the chemicals itself, rather than ship them overseas for someone else to dispose of.
He said it was embarrassing that such a highly-developed country such as Australia did not have a facility to dispose of such waste.
While expensive, the technology was available, and Orica should spend the money to build such a facility.
"It's high time they dealt with it," Mr Lorenz said, adding that the government should now be prodding Orica into action.
Orica said earlier this year that any disposal plant for such chemicals built in Australia would quickly become redundant because of the limited amount of the waste.
Already some $15 million had been spent on a purpose-built repackaging facility for the waste, the majority of which is contaminated construction rubble, it said.
Additional reporting: AFP, AAP

[BlackCat]

Ah, that's why there hasn't been any notices about it here. It's a bit stupid, but I guess that you can import waste from China to be destroyed in your superflous incenerator

[Egbert]

Who is importing Chinese waste for incineration?

[BlackCat]

None, but if you build one that can't repaid itself, you might be tempted.

[Egbert]

The problem is sduch a plant will require considerable expense and technical expertise just to get rid of this batch of waste. The company doesn't want to build the plant to get rid of it. The government doesn't want to build it either.

Now that the Danish have refused to take and treat the waste it just siotting in storage indefinitely. There is opposition to sending it aaywhere by sea due its high toxicity. Now that the Danish have refused to take and treat the waste it just siotting in expensive storage indefinitely.

I do not know what will happen. Perhaps the government will make the company build a plant or perhaps government will subsidise a plant. Or maybe the waste will be dumped somewhere (I hope not).

[MattBowron]

In relation to people worrying about climate change, what if I mentioned the fact that scientists believe that during the time of the dinosaurs there were no Arctic or Antarctic ice? Mainly what they're saying is that the world became more tropical, and if dinosaurs could live for millions of years during such tropical changes, why couldn't man if he adapted to the environment?

[ricketyclik]

In relation to people worrying about climate change, what if I mentioned the fact that scientists believe that during the time of the dinosaurs there were no Arctic or Antarctic ice? Mainly what they're saying is that the world became more tropical, and if dinosaurs could live for millions of years during such tropical changes, why couldn't man if he adapted to the environment?

You have just enunciated precisely the concern with rapid climate change. The dinosaurs lived for hundreds of millions of years in a stable climate, then suffered wholesale extinction when it changed rapidly.

[Qilue]

You have just enunciated precisely the concern with rapid climate change. The dinosaurs lived for hundreds of millions of years in a stable climate, then suffered wholesale extinction when it changed rapidly.

The onset of the K-T boundary climate change you're referencing was far more rapid than current change in climate due to human activity.

[ricketyclik]

The onset of the K-T boundary climate change you're referencing was far more rapid than current change in climate due to human activity.

Yes it was. Virtually instant as opposed to a century or two. But in evolutionary timescales they are virtually the same, compared with the typical tens of thousands of years a few degrees change takes. We are creating our own home-made meteorite strike.

[Dinner]

BTW the climate was hardly stable for "hundreds of millions of years" until the K-T event.