[talaniman]

I'm just glad you haters, and deniers are a minority.

[jlisenbe]

Did you watch the Everest video? Do you ever walk in urban and suburban areas and along trafficked roads? Take a paper garbage bag with you. Hey, go to a fast-food restaurant and observe people throwing wrappers out of their car windows as they leave the driveup and get back onto the main road. Humans are pigs.

Climate change. We are talking about climate change. What your human pig brethren do is between you and them.

Complete nonsense for which you have, as usual, no evidence at all.


Google "plastic manfacturing climate change" (minus the quote marks)

As I said, you have nothing, as it always is. You make the claim; you do the research to back it up.

You didn't read this that I posted (and there are many other sites like it by other science people and groups):
https://yaleclimateconnections.org/2...limate-change/

I will read it now...reluctantly.

[jlisenbe]

I read it. It basically makes silly points such as, "Oh my goodness. We have to transport plastic and that releases CO2. We use it for packaging that has to be transported and that releases CO2." If we weren't using plastics for packaging, we could use cardboard which would have to be transported...and release CO2. At no point was any reasonable estimate made on how much the use of plastics contributes to climate change. Did you see that???

I should have known better. In fact, I did.

[Wondergirl]

At no point was any reasonable estimate made on how much the use of plastics contributes to climate change. Did you see that???

I should have known better. In fact, I did.

You didn't see those percentages?

[jlisenbe]

Nope. Neither did you.

[Wondergirl]

Nope. Neither did you.

Reading comprehension again?

***Under a business-as-usual scenario in which policies continue to foster plastics production, the sector’s fossil fuel consumption will only increase. Today, about 4-8% of annual global oil consumption is associated with plastics, according to the World Economic Forum. If this reliance on plastics persists, plastics will account for 20% of oil consumption by 2050.***
And a bit further in the article:
***Land disturbance also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions associated with extraction. Kelso said each mile of pipeline must be surrounded by a “right of way” zone of cleared land. About 19.2 million acres have been cleared for oil and gas development in the United States. Assuming just a third of the impacted land is forested, 1.686 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere as a result of clearing, authors of the CIEL report said.
“These figures really add up over time because you’re talking about millions of miles of pipelines in the United States,” Kelso said. “You have to clear cut. So you’re taking all of the carbon from the trees and from soils and removing that from the earth basically and introducing it to the atmosphere.”***

[jlisenbe]

Oh come on. You're being completely foolish. The issue was this. "...At no point was any reasonable estimate made on how much the use of plastics contributes to climate change."

All your quote noted was the percentage of oil that goes into making plastic. That itself does nothing to add to climate change. The last paragraph was laughable. "So you're taking all of the carbon from the trees and from the soils and removing that from the earth and introducing it to the atmosphere." What? They are really attempting to make a point that the miniscule, tiny amount of land affected by pipeline construction has anything even approaching a significant effect on global warming? That's completely stupid.

[Wondergirl]

And you're an educator? I weep.

[jlisenbe]

Weep on, sister. Weep for yourself. You completely missed the most simple question by half a mile.

[Wondergirl]

Weep on, sister. Weep for yourself. You completely missed the most simple question by half a mile.

Then YOU tell me the answer.

[Athos]

Then YOU tell me the answer.

He has no answer. He is what is called a contrarian. He'll oppose any point you have for his troll-like pleasure. He'll do this until the cows come home. It's fun when he's so wrong - like in this thread.

[Wondergirl]

Weep on, sister. Weep for yourself. You completely missed the most simple question by half a mile.

Actually, you're asking the wrong question. You asked: "How much [does] the use of plastics [contribute] to climate change?"

I answered a much more important question: "How much does the manufacture of plastics contribute to climate change?"

[paraclete]

Actually, you're asking the wrong question. You asked: "How much [does] the use of plastics [contribute] to climate change?"

I answered a much more important question: "How much does the manufacture of plastics contribute to climate change?"

To paraphase an old movie" frankly my dear, he doesn't give a damn"

[jlisenbe]

Actually, you're asking the wrong question. You asked: "How much [does] the use of plastics [contribute] to climate change?"

I answered a much more important question: "How much does the manufacture of plastics contribute to climate change?"

Actually, you answered neither. Your passage only alluded to how much petroleum goes into making plastic. That does not answer or even address the question. The only reference to greenhouse gases was completely speculative and even if true, would amount to a tiny, tiny, tiny portion of CO2 released into the atmosphere. The figure of nearly 2 bil tons over a period of many years must be seen in light of over 40 billion tons PER year as a total, so the figure, if accepted, basically has no meaning. Even worse, it assumes that all of the pipelines supply petrol only to plastics industries. That of course is laughingly untrue.

***Under a business-as-usual scenario in which policies continue to foster plastics production, the sector’s fossil fuel consumption will only increase. Today, about 4-8% of annual global oil consumption is associated with plastics, according to the World Economic Forum. If this reliance on plastics persists, plastics will account for 20% of oil consumption by 2050.***
And a bit further in the article:
***Land disturbance also contributes to greenhouse gas emissions associated with extraction. Kelso said each mile of pipeline must be surrounded by a “right of way” zone of cleared land. About 19.2 million acres have been cleared for oil and gas development in the United States. Assuming just a third of the impacted land is forested, 1.686 billion metric tons of carbon dioxide are released into the atmosphere as a result of clearing, authors of the CIEL report said.
“These figures really add up over time because you’re talking about millions of miles of pipelines in the United States,” Kelso said. “You have to clear cut. So you’re taking all of the carbon from the trees and from soils and removing that from the earth basically and introducing it to the atmosphere.”***

[paraclete]

Ok I throw one into the mix regarding solving the "problem". remove all manufacturing from China's dirty industries, and avoid reestablishing them in any country signed up to the BRI. China is financing coal fired power stations in places like Pakistan

[talaniman]

Ok I throw one into the mix regarding solving the "problem". remove all manufacturing from China's dirty industries, and avoid reestablishing them in any country signed up to the BRI. China is financing coal fired power stations in places like Pakistan

So it is a global problem?

[paraclete]

No, as I have said for a long time, it is a northern hemisphere problem

[Athos]

No, as I have said for a long time, it is a northern hemisphere problem

Global warming is happening in both hemispheres, but more slowly in the South because of the greater land mass in the North. Ocean water warms slowly.

[paraclete]

no tal the theory is AGW is caused by humans emitting CO2 from industry, to wit, burning of fossil fuels, if you quit this in the northern hemisphere problem solved. Now I don't believe this but I do know that the ocean absorbs CO2

[talaniman]

No, as I have said for a long time, it is a northern hemisphere problem

Creeping south as we speak!

Global warming is happening in both hemispheres, but more slowly in the South because of the greater land mass in the North. Ocean water warms slowly.

And expanding industrialization!

no tal the theory is AGW is caused by humans emitting CO2 from industry, to wit, burning of fossil fuels, if you quit this in the northern hemisphere problem solved. Now I don't believe this but I do know that the ocean absorbs CO2

At least you're finally catching on and that's a start.