De Omni Scribili

Scribblings Of Ed Wiebe

Tom Fletcher has Opinions, Loudly.

Tom Fletcher is wrong about climate change: Volume 16

written by me, twitter-->@edwiebe, 2019-02-20

My Tom Fletcher is wrong about climate change index page.

My main Tom Fletcher is wrong about climate change page.

His opinions have been archived.

Mr Tom Fletcher BC's latest foray into things climate change is, as usual, a mess.

TF: This is how the U.S. became the only one of the climate-posturing countries from the Paris summit in 2015 to actually produce a significant cut in greenhouse gas emissions. As with ratings for hosting the long-running TV reality show The Apprentice, [*&^%#%$] beat Arnie hands down.

It's going to be fun watching how Tom Fletcher's opinion of what the elephant next door is doing to reduce emissions changes over time. So far, it's not really going that well.

From the BBC we read the following text.

Report: US 2018 CO2 emissions saw biggest spike in years

A new report has found that US carbon dioxide emissions rose by 3.4% in 2018 after three years of decline.

The data shows the US is unlikely to meet its pledge to reduce emissions by 2025 under the Paris climate agreement.

Under President *&^%#%$, the US is set to leave the Paris accord in 2020 while his administration has ended many existing environmental protections.

What is working, here in Canada, for the elephant next door, and around the world, is forcing people to pay for pollution and adding new energy systems that don't rely on fossil carbon at all. Something like the (perhaps) expensive green projects the previous government signed contracts to get online.

TF:If Green Party folks were serious about greenhouse gases, they’d be calling for nuclear plants.

Let me be the first to point out that being serious about greenhouse gases doesn't result in an innate desire to build new nuclear power generation. While it's true that nuclear power generation is one of the cleanest sources of electricity we can construct it's fraught with issues. Not least of which is the irrational fear of the general public. It's also quite expensive (though maybe not forever quite expensive). Maybe we'd end up spending much more on nuclear than we would on alternative sources like hydroelectric, wind, solar, geothermal, and so one.

It is a bit amusing to think about the way Tom Fletcher has constructed this 'essay'. Unfortunately, Tom Fletcher doesn't see the false dichotomy he's constructed. His fans won't see it either. Like Tom Fletcher, thinking things through is not their collective strength.

This page took 0.3 milliseconds to generate.