The Carbon Bubble -- Oh, the horror

[IDemo]

Shift from fossil fuels risks popping 'carbon bubble':

Lima (AFP) - The transition from fossil fuels must be carefully managed to avoid an economically disastrous bursting of the "carbon bubble," the World Bank's top climate official said on Saturday.

Decades of reliance on oil, gas and coal have made them central to the global economy, and polluting industries risk a potentially catastrophic crash as the world shifts to alternative energies, said Rachel Kyte, the Bank's special envoy for climate change.

"If we accept that we need to have less carbon in our growth, then we might have a financial risk associated with the prominence in our economy of companies who are heavily invested in carbon. That's the whole question of the carbon bubble," Kyte told AFP on the sidelines of the World Bank's annual meeting in Lima, Peru.

Clutch UN climate talks in Paris in December will try to reach a comprehensive deal on cutting carbon emissions.

http://news.yahoo.com/shift-fossil-fuels-risks-popping-carbon-bubble-world-203433539.html

[Erich Bloodaxe BSN]

1. Cry me a river.

For the economic losses of those who have made trillions of dollars keeping us tied to an energy source that's killing complex lifeforms on the planet.

[Darb]

2. It's actually a legitimate concern.

Millions of people work for industries that completely depend upon fossil fuels. Not just coal and oil to fuel vehicles, but vehicles themselves (manufacturers and repair) , airlines, the list is endless. Without a transition plan or timetable, industries could collapse, layoffs could be enormous, capital flight could cause huge layoffs too.

The concern is about the economy as a whole. How will the earth's economy transition? Too slowly I am afraid, but we shall see. If huge companies like Exxon would use their vast capital to invest more seriously in alternatives they could be the bridge. But I doubt that.

It is a problem. I think massive government investment in green energy must be a big part of it.

[RiverLover]

3. What should be the only concern - by 2100, life on earth may not be sustainable.

Dead people don't have to worry about buying shoes or paying their mortgages.

http://thinkprogress.org/climate/2015/09/28/3706024/paris-co2-pledges/

[Darb]

4. I suppose that you have a genius plan to feed the human form of "life on earth" then.

Awaiting the details.

[RiverLover]

7. Wow, where did that come from? We need to ACT, that is my genius plan.

And our candidates should be talking about our mass murder/suicide of sustainable life. And how we need to end the burning of fossil fuels. Switch to renewables.

Stop subsidizing Big Oil. When Shell goes to Alaska, for ex, to search for oil, its the American taxpayers who cover the costs. That's for ALL off shore oil exploration.

We should stop that, maybe?

And how we need to end mass production of cow meat. CFAs need to end....

We need to change how we treat the earth, We need a radical change NOW.

And our media should be talking more about it.

And by the way, there will be no humans to feed if we keep on this path of heads in sand & money now is the only thing that matters. Worst of all, we're killing all the magnificent plants & animals on earth as well.

[ronnie624]

12. The economic system is already in place,

converting energy into goods and services and driving technological development and so forth. The only thing that is really needed right now, is a change in our collective world view and a rearrangement of our priorities. The reality is, our civilization is under serious threat from potential climatic upheaval. People need this to sink in and act accordingly.

[hifiguy]

20. Yup. Naomi Klein spent a whole book

explaining it all. "This Changes Everything" should be required reading everywhere.

[6chars]

5. Carbon tax would be a good step

if dems can retake congress, this could really happen. u.s. failure to have one is slowing down the whole world's response. the revenues from the tax can fund transition to green energy.

as for the popping of the bubble, i think the idea is we would still have vehicles and such, they just wouldn't be burning fossil fuels, so there would still be those jobs and industries. countries like saudi arabia, qatar, kuwait, and the united arab emirates would have to cut back on some of their projects.

[yeoman6987]

17. As long as it's not cap and trade

I never understood why Democratic Party wanted this. It should be cap and no trade.

[6chars]

18. probably right

cap and trade sounds good in theory but in practice it would become an Enron thing

[Crunchy Frog]

11. If they'd been bothering to think about this over the past 30 years

There probably wouldn't be such a crunch right now.

[pipoman]

6. It is granny's retirement and and my 401k that matters....

And I agree that we cannot stop the movement away from fossil fuels and also agree that too quick and it could have devastating economic impact..

[DisgustipatedinCA]

8. Ironically enough, we will be able to call out atmosphere a carbon bubble one day.

Except we won't really be able to call it a carbon bubble because it won't sustain life and we'll be dead. Ask any Venusians you may happen to know.

[Octafish]

9. A Green Carbon Bubble.

At $100 a barrel it's worth twice as much as it is at $50 a barrel.

[IDemo]

10. SA has been claiming ~267BB since Jed Clampitt was around

And the so-called petroleum authorities have never questioned them.

[Octafish]

14. Funny how active the Saudies have become, investing in politicians, I mean lobbying.

This doesn't even mention the Safari Club:

Top 10 foreign governments paying for influence in 2013

1. UAE 14.2 million

2. Germany $12 million

3. Canada $11.2 million

4. Saudi Arabia $11.1 million

5. Mexico $6.1 million

6. Morocco $4 million

7. South Korea $3.9 million

8. Republika Srpska (Bosnian Serb Republic) $2.4 million

9. Georgia $2.3 million

10. Azerbaijan $2.3 million

Source: Sunlight Foundation

http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/in-the-loop/wp/2014/05/14/which-foreign-countries-spent-the-most-to-influence-u-s-politics/

Wonder what he correlation would be when barrel prices start to drop?

[ChisolmTrailDem]

15. Absolutely correct. And whether they admit it or not, they're going solar and that alone should...

...clue people in as to where they internally see their numbers.

[NickB79]

13. The problem is, we are already out of time

Short of an IMMEDIATE cessation to carbon emissions, we'll easily hit 2-3C of warming by the end of this century just based on the carbon we've already emitted and the positive feedbacks they're unleashing RIGHT NOW. The current monster El Nino, for example is now predicted to kill almost 40% of the world's coral reefs by the time it ends next year: http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/technology-science/science/coral-reefs-face-climate-change-6600800

Coral reefs are the rainforests of the ocean. A loss of 38% globally is akin to clear-cutting the ENTIRE Amazon basin. And this is with "only" a 0.8C rise in global temps in the past 150 years.

And if you scare easily, don't even start to imagine what will happen in the century after that, because warming doesn't just stop in 2100. Eventually, a sizable portion of the planet may simply be too warm and humid to even support human life without basically doming or burying entire cities and/or running A/C nonstop: http://www.purdue.edu/newsroom/research/2010/100504HuberLimits.html

That amount of warming will destroy large portions of the planet's biomes and guarantee that billions of people will either become climate refugees, or die in the ensuing conflicts. Large portions of the planet will have "governments" more akin to Somali or Afghan warlords than democratic civil society.

So, the idea that we can pull off a carefully managed transition over the next 30-40 years so as to not pop the carbon bubble and still keep a livable planet for our grandchildren to inherit is ludicrous. Even during such a transition, we'll still see atmospheric CO2 levels peaking around 500-600 ppm, which will guarantee large portions of the Arctic and Antarctic will thaw, unleashing billions more tons of methane and other greenhouse gases, creating a positive feedback loop out of our control.

We either collapse the economy now, endure decades of hardship, and pass on a livable planet to the kids, or we enjoy the fruits of 21st century technology for another few decades and leave the grandkids a dessicated shell of a world.

I have no doubt in my mind what option the world's political leaders have already chosen, as they're all well aware of what's really going on.

[ronnie624]

16. People need to get through their thick skulls, that the situation is dire.

The changes to our energy system have to be dramatic, and they have to be made now, in order for human civilization to survive.

[hifiguy]

19. Tough shit and hard cheese

for the plutocrats of environmental destruction. Let 'em starve.