The entire Green argument for Ireland decreasing its C02 emissions is bogus

Fred Cryton

Their entire argument for decreasing emissions (7% annually is now sacrosanct) is completely based on a misunderstanding (or deliberate misunderstanding) of statistics.


I've made this point before but Colm McCarthy does well in the Indo:


https://www.independent.ie/opinion/comment/climate-and-covid-19-heed-no-borders-39194001.html


The EU per capita emissions statistics are flawed for two major reasons:


1) They include agriculture. This is a production activity. Ireland produces good produce, and essentially the Greens want to penalize us for this. This would be equivalent to penalizing Saudi Arabia because they produce a lot of oil. Incidentally, oil production is not included in Saudi Arabia's C02 emissions. The C02 emissions of the oil produce of Saudi ARabia is correctly allocated to the countires who actually consume the oil. This is how it should be done. Consumption, not production. Any reduction in Irish production will simply be shifted to other countries, because we certainly won't be eating less.


2) Agriculture is included in the EU stats but there's no taking account of population density. Essentially the EU punishes countries with low population density, because they will have a large amount of agricultural land relative to fewer people. This is madness because surely the Greens want fewer consumers in the world and more open spaces so we should be rewarding low population density!!!


The overall point is little clean and Green Ireland is going to absolutely castrate itself to get the Greens into government on the basis of a complete lie and subtle misunderstanding of the numbers.

Pkiernan

Its Green Guilt, and plays well to left wing student types in Ireland.

Funny how I didnt meet any Greens when our village organised a litter clear up.

My neighbours and I were pulling discarded rubbish from ditches, while the Greenies were all busy saving the planet by tweeting about carbon...

Put a 50c Carbon tax on Twitter and TikTok instead.

Thelonious Monk

The plan is to move away from oil as much as we can though. We signed up to the Paris Agreement which agreed to a big decrease in CO2 emissions. I'm pretty sure the Greens weren't leading our government when we signed up to this. Is it wrong for the Greens to expect commitments made by governments to be realised?

Fred Cryton

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The plan is to move away from oil as much as we can though. We signed up to the Paris Agreement which agreed to a big decrease in CO2 emissions. I'm pretty sure the Greens weren't leading our government when we signed up to this. Is it wrong for the Greens to expect commitments made by governments to be realised?

99% of all politicians would fail to understand the statistical points i made in the OP.



The point is the EU per capita C02 emissions is flawed as a metric to be used, for the reasons outlined.



So they would all want to wise up and quit the Green virtue signalling

n97 mini

The emissions from producing Irish beef occur in Ireland, not where the beef is consumed. Saudi Arabia doesn't burn the oil it produces, other countries do. Hence they get the emissions. At first it doesn't seem fair, but there isn't really an alternative.

Long term Irish farmers have to diversify.

SomeGuyCalledMi

Pkiernan wrote: »

Its Green Guilt, and plays well to left wing student types in Ireland.

Funny how I didnt meet any Greens when our village organised a litter clear up.

My neighbours and I were pulling discarded rubbish from ditches, while the Greenies were all busy saving the planet by tweeting about carbon...

Put a 50c Carbon tax on Twitter and TikTok instead.

Can you explain what you mean my this Pkiernan. Do you think its only Green party voters that want us to reduce green house gas emisions?

Did you really ask everyone on the letter clean up what party they vote for?

Fair play to you for cleaning up rubish and telling us all about it on the internet while other people tweeted. I would now like to point out to you that you are doing exactly the same thing.

50c tax on boards posts too maybe?

Harry Palmr

1) They include agriculture. This is a production activity. Ireland produces good produce, and essentially the Greens want to penalize us for this. This would be equivalent to penalizing Saudi Arabia because they produce a lot of oil. Incidentally, oil production is not included in Saudi Arabia's C02 emissions. The C02 emissions of the oil produce of Saudi ARabia is correctly allocated to the countries who actually consume the oil. This is how it should be done. Consumption, not production. Any reduction in Irish production will simply be shifted to other countries, because we certainly won't be eating less.

The Greens believe the source needs tackling as much as the end user market as the pollution is HERE. That not a misunderstanding its policy. The idea is that we produce cleaner not that we export dirt.

Truthvader

Oil is running out so the problem will solve itself without nannying by Greens. Wheres sleazy Gormley these days? Enjoying his pension I'd say. Bike not out of the shed for years. A party of spoofers and busy body nannies

Thelonious Monk

We had a carbon tax increase the other day, I suppose that was the Green's fault as well?

_Brian

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The plan is to move away from oil as much as we can though. We signed up to the Paris Agreement which agreed to a big decrease in CO2 emissions. I'm pretty sure the Greens weren't leading our government when we signed up to this. Is it wrong for the Greens to expect commitments made by governments to be realised?

New evidence has come to light on the CO2 absorbed into soils growing grass. Teagasc have a knowledges this plus hedgerow absorption hasn’t been included.

When these are accounted for agriculture has already done its part.

C02 emissions from livestock are probably 10-12% of total where fossil fuel consumption is about 60-65%

We all know where the changes need to be made but there is a Vegan secondary agenda to blacken livestock farming to satisfy their own emotionally crippled belief structures. That’s the real truth !

washman3

Truthvader wrote: »

Oil is running out so the problem will solve itself without nannying by Greens. Wheres sleazy Gormley these days? Enjoying his pension I'd say. Bike not out of the shed for years. A party of spoofers and busy body nannies

Probably 'suffering' during the lockdown in his luxury villa in the South of France while bursting his a##e laughing at the misguided clowns who voted for him and those still 'carrying on the cause'

Thelonious Monk

_Brian wrote: »

New evidence has come to light on the CO2 absorbed into soils growing grass. Teagasc have a knowledges this plus hedgerow absorption hasn’t been included

The way things are going we may not have many hedgerows left in a while, video after video online of destroyed hedgerows lately from people pouring chemicals all over them, chemicals which could end up in water supplies.
Co2 might absorb in grass but we still need to rewild some of the land, it shouldn't be just grass and barren uplands, we have a biodiversity crisis in Ireland, and grazing rights need to go imo.

jackboy

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

The way things are going we may not have many hedgerows left in a while, video after video online of destroyed hedgerows lately from people pouring chemicals all over them, chemicals which could end up in water supplies.

Is this not mainly roadside hedges sprayed by the council’s though. Very easy for the government to fix that.

Harry Palmr

Truthvader wrote: »

Oil is running out so the problem will solve itself without nannying by Greens. Wheres sleazy Gormley these days? Enjoying his pension I'd say. Bike not out of the shed for years. A party of spoofers and busy body nannies

People have been saying this since it was first discovered!

In 1980 642 billion barrels were known to be in recoverable fields in 2018 that number was 1730 billion barrels

Thelonious Monk

jackboy wrote: »

Is this not mainly roadside hedges sprayed by the council’s though. Very easy for the government to fix that.

Farmers, councils, Iarnrod Eireann...


https://mobile.twitter.com/wildfullstop/status/1259414055980236800

Pkiernan

SomeGuyCalledMi wrote: »

Can you explain what you mean my this Pkiernan. Do you think its only Green party voters that want us to reduce green house gas emisions?

Did you really ask everyone on the letter clean up what party they vote for?

Fair play to you for cleaning up rubish and telling us all about it on the internet while other people tweeted. I would now like to point out to you that you are doing exactly the same thing.

50c tax on boards posts too maybe?

My point is that Irish greenies are all talk, no action.

Markcheese

n97 mini wrote: »

The emissions from producing Irish beef occur in Ireland, not where the beef is consumed. Saudi Arabia doesn't burn the oil it produces, other countries do. Hence they get the emissions. At first it doesn't seem fair, but there isn't really an alternative.

Long term Irish farmers have to diversify.

Into what exactly ? If the money is in diversification Irish farmers will move ....just telling them move or even hitting them with a stick ain't gonna work. .

Fred Cryton

n97 mini wrote: »

The emissions from producing Irish beef occur in Ireland, not where the beef is consumed. Saudi Arabia doesn't burn the oil it produces, other countries do. Hence they get the emissions. At first it doesn't seem fair, but there isn't really an alternative.

Long term Irish farmers have to diversify.

It doesn't seem fair, because it's not fair.


If they want to include agriculture, fine. Allocate the C02 emissions to the consumers.

Thelonious Monk

Fred Cryton wrote: »

It doesn't seem fair, because it's not fair.


If they want to include agriculture, fine. Allocate the C02 emissions to the consumers.

Life isn't fair

Fred Cryton

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Life isn't fair

So we're supposed to bend over for the Greens based on a statistical lie?

Markcheese

There's an awful lot we can do to reduce greenhouse gases , there's a hell of a lot farmers can do ...
But methane from livestock is a very divisive subject ...methane is a very powerful greenhouse gas but not very long lived (when compared to co2),so what's being released now is replacing what was released aprox 10 years ago ...ie. the methane from Irish cattle is not increasing in the atmosphere ...
Unlike co2,
Grasslands can ( not always ,but can ) absorb,and sequester large amounts of co2,

Shefwedfan

You do realize every party had a large section on climate change in all their manifesto, sorry I lie S.F. didn’t.

Why just mention the Green Party?

Thelonious Monk

Fred Cryton wrote: »

So we're supposed to bend over for the Greens based on a statistical lie?

We're supposed to greatly cut our emissions based on the Paris agreement that FG signed up for

Markcheese

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

Life isn't fair

Are we talking about reducing greenhouse gases ,or just farmer bashing ?
(And if we're on the life's not fair bit ,farmers and rural dwellers have considerable political clout ,that's the way our political system works ,but there you go that's just the way it is .... We could have a whinge about it or ,get on with trying to reduce green house gases ..)

Shefwedfan

Fred Cryton wrote: »

So we're supposed to bend over for the Greens based on a statistical lie?

I don’t need the greens to ask me, I want to do it myself. Do you not want to leave a decent place for your children? Not have your kids dying with lungs diseases?

Shefwedfan

Also did you listen to any of the interviews with the Green Party? Or just rehashing some old stories which are no longer relevant

The only bit they mentioned in recent interview was some farmers going to organic which is the way the market is going anyway, someone else put on here 250 or something farmers applied for organic grants and only 50 got them

The rest was around
Public Transport - 100% makes sense
Solar PV - makes sense
Wind farms in ocean - makes sense
Connecting to Europe for power - makes sense
Rewet of peatlands - makes sense

The main point they made was not to point fingers, oh look Ian so green and that other person isn’t....I suggest you listen and come back....it was on Pat Kenny

SomeGuyCalledMi

Many farmers are beef farmers because that is what their father did and what they have done their whole lives.

But beef prices tell is there is no future in it. The average Irish family beef farm makes 10k a year!

Farmers need serious help to diversify.

Fred Cryton

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

We're supposed to greatly cut our emissions based on the Paris agreement that FG signed up for

Which they shouldn't have, based on a flawed statistical anaysis as outlined in my OP.



FF and FG are only paying lip service to the Green agenda in order to win over the brainwashed youth. How many of those youngsters would be able to truly understand anything i wrote in the OP.

Shefwedfan

SomeGuyCalledMi wrote: »

Many farmers are beef farmers because that is what their father did and what they have done their whole lives.

But beef prices tell is there is no future in it. The average Irish family beef farm makes 10k a year!

Farmers need serious help to diversify.

2015 the government started to try help farmer move so this is not a new things

https://www.google.ie/amp/s/amp.irishexaminer.com/ireland/grants-scheme-launched-to-encourage-farmers-to-go-organic-325281.html

It was also reopened in 2018

Thelonious Monk

Fred Cryton wrote: »

Which they shouldn't have, based on a flawed statistical anaysis as outlined in my OP.



FF and FG are only paying lip service to the Green agenda in order to win over the brainwashed youth. How many of those youngsters would be able to truly understand anything i wrote in the OP.

You're making a lot of assumptions here about the population. I don't agree with what you're getting at anyway, just because we've less people doesn't mean we should have the island covered in farms and no nature. Every country needs to clean up its back yard and if that means producing less meat so be it, we shouldn't be worrying about where it might be produced if we don't do it.

_Brian

Thelonious Monk wrote: »

We're supposed to greatly cut our emissions based on the Paris agreement that FG signed up for

Sticking by something when new scientific data contradicts it is cult behaviour.

We should always, always follow the best most current widely agreed science. Specifically weeding out paid for compromised “research” such as the EATLamcet report.