Austria sues European Union, claiming natural gas and nuclear energy are not 'green'

[tetrasect]

You neglect to mention that only 50% of what they absorb gets released, so still a net positive. That's where the wood comes from.

FLR Activity	CO2 Removal Rate over 20 years
Planted forests and woodlots	4.5 to 40.7 t CO2/ha/year
Mangrove restoration	23.1 t CO2/ha/year
Natural regeneration	9.1–18.8 t CO2/ha/year
Agroforestry	0.8–15.6 t CO2/ha/year

We would need to plant trees on an area the size of Australia to offset CO2 emissions.

 

[ForceFate]

FLR Activity	CO2 Removal Rate over 20 years
Planted forests and woodlots	4.5 to 40.7 t CO2/ha/year
Mangrove restoration	23.1 t CO2/ha/year
Natural regeneration	9.1–18.8 t CO2/ha/year
Agroforestry	0.8–15.6 t CO2/ha/year

We would need to plant trees on an area the size of Australia to offset CO2 emissions.

If only China was planting trees and not painting rocks green to fool those watching from above.

 

[wingnut771]

If only China was planting trees and not painting rocks green to fool those watching from above.

and stapling fake plastic leaves onto dead trees.

 

[Eniigma]

 

[Ponderer]

View attachment 1401277

Bonhoeffer was right.
Stupidity poses a far bigger problem/threat than malice.
And there is clearly a lot of stupid.
Some people are so stupid that they can even be brainwashed to believe there are more than 2 genders.
Apparently, it's Science.
Apparently, 2 + 2 = 5.

 

[ForceFate]

Bonhoeffer was right.
Stupidity poses a far bigger problem/threat than malice.
And there is clearly a lot of stupid.
Some people are so stupid that they can even be brainwashed to believe there are more than 2 genders.
Apparently, it's Science.
Apparently, 2 + 2 = 5.

You're yet to post proof that CO2 is insignificantly low to be of any concern with regards to global warming.

 

[wingnut771]

You're yet to post proof that CO2 is insignificantly low to be of any concern with regards to global warming.

Never mind methane which is much worse.

Atmospheric methane - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Methane and climate: 10 things you should know

The graph above shows methane concentrations in Earth's atmosphere over the past 10,000+ years: 8000 BCE to 2018 CE. The units are parts per billion (ppb). The year 1800 is marked with a circle. Note the ominous spike. As a result of increasing human-caused emissions, atmospheric methane...

www.darrinqualman.com

 

[Ponderer]

You're yet to post proof that CO2 is insignificantly low to be of any concern with regards to global warming.

The Burden of Proof lies with those that claim there is a "climate crises" (whatever the hell that means) and that "CO2 emissions are busy killing the planet".
It (the Burden of Proof) does not lie with those that see this BS for what it is.

But you know this, right?

 

[Ponderer]

Never mind methane which is much worse.
View attachment 1401411 View attachment 1401415

Atmospheric methane - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Methane and climate: 10 things you should know

The graph above shows methane concentrations in Earth's atmosphere over the past 10,000+ years: 8000 BCE to 2018 CE. The units are parts per billion (ppb). The year 1800 is marked with a circle. Note the ominous spike. As a result of increasing human-caused emissions, atmospheric methane...

www.darrinqualman.com

CO2 emission tax/es.
CH4 emission tax/es.

Enough said.

 

[ToxicBunny]

The Burden of Proof lies with those that claim there is a "climate crises" (whatever the hell that means) and that "CO2 emissions are busy killing the planet".
It (the Burden of Proof) does not lie with those that see this BS for what it is.

But you know this, right?

Burden of proof on the CO2 side is somewhat overwhelming in comparison to your 'its a scam' foot stomping temper tantrum.

 

[wingnut771]

CO2 emission tax/es.
CH4 emission tax/es.

Enough said.

Politicians riding on the issue.

Enough said.

 

[ForceFate]

The Burden of Proof lies with those that claim there is a "climate crises" (whatever the hell that means) and that "CO2 emissions are busy killing the planet".
It (the Burden of Proof) does not lie with those that see this BS for what it is.

But you know this, right?

This sums it up pretty well.

 

[Ponderer]

Burden of proof on the CO2 side is somewhat overwhelming in comparison to your 'its a scam' foot stomping temper tantrum.

You're once again projecting mate.

 

[Ponderer]

This sums it up pretty well.

LOL @ "greater than 99% consensus".

But yes - you're right - it does sum it up pretty well.

 

[ForceFate]

LOL @ "greater than 99% consensus".

But yes - you're right - it does sum it up pretty well.

You didn't even read the document, did you?

 

[ToxicBunny]

You're once again projecting mate.

Doubtful mate...

I'm not the one making a batshyte retarded claim and then refusing to back it up despite numerous requests.

 

[Ponderer]

Doubtful mate...

I'm not the one making a batshyte retarded claim and then refusing to back it up despite numerous requests.

I not a brainwashed soft-in-the-head "climate cultist".
Now ask yourself .........

 

[ToxicBunny]

I not a brainwashed soft-in-the-head "climate cultist".
Now ask yourself .........

I have asked myself, and I've asked you for evidence which you have as of yet steadfastly refused to supply...

 

[tetrasect]

I not a brainwashed soft-in-the-head "climate cultist".

Yes you are.

That is exactly what you are.

 

[Ponderer]

I have asked myself,

And what was the answer, my little cupcake.

and I've asked you for evidence which you have as of yet steadfastly refused to supply...

I have explained it over and over.
Classic Dunning-Kruger though.
Clever enough to understand (be fooled by) some or other BS and to conclude that it must therefore be true (because you understand the BS) , but not clever enough to recognize the BS for what it is.
Thoroughly brainwashed.