Global average temperatures have risen about 1.1 degrees Celsius since preindustrial times. At current rates, they could exceed 1.5 degrees by 2030. And global greenhouse gas emissions, after a brief lull from 2014 to 2016, are rising again.
Even if countries can live up to their pledges in the Paris climate agreement, we’ll hit the year 2100 somewhere in the neighborhood of 3 degrees. New LSE research reveals all countries signed up to the Paris Agreement now have at least one national law or policy on climate change, but in most cases it is very little.
While as of 2015, renewable energy provided 19.3 percent of final global energy consumption. Excluding traditional biomass (burning wood for heat and cooking), it was 10.2 percent. Without hydro, that was 6.6 percent. Wind, solar, geothermal, and biomass electricity together accounted for 1.6 percent.
Clearly, demand is still outstripping production.
A report from several international agencies, including International Energy Agency (IEA), International Renewable Energy Agency (IRENA), United Nations Statistics Division (UNSD) shows that possibility of cutting global greenhouse gas emissions in the years and decades ahead is bleak.
Despite big gains in renewables deployment and cost reductions, and the expansion of carbon pricing, curbing CO2 is not happening nearly fast enough to prevent highly dangerous levels of warming. Emissions risen slightly last year after a 3-year plateau.
Another analysis in the journal Nature finds that “the world is on track for more than 3 °C of warming by the end of the century…Renewable energy is indeed undergoing a revolution, as prices for things such as solar panels, wind turbines and lithium-ion batteries continue to plummet. And yet it is also true that the world remains dependent on fossil fuels — so much so that even small economic shifts can quickly overwhelm the gains made with clean energy.”
Got sucked in a hole
Now there’s a hole in the sky
And the ground’s not cold
And if the ground’s not cold
Everything is gonna burn
We’ll all take turns, I’ll get mine too
This monkey’s gone to Heaven” –Pixies, This Monkey Gone to Heaven
Here again, your wrong Mr. Creed, the hot water in the Pacific is coming through the Panama Canal an entering and warming the Atlantis Ocean and that Mr. Creed is where the hot temperature is coming from. I suggest Mr.Creed you do better research when writing an article, first thing of a journalist is to be non-bias, you Mr. Creed have been doing just that, given your opinion on most of your electronic paper writing.
You also carry a view to embarrassing the U.S. President like no oil drilling off our coast, think about this Mr.Creed how many high paying job would that bring to our County, the Democrats that you favor don’t want it but what have they done to create jobs here ‘NOTHING’. So Mr. Creed your a Democrat and you show it, that’s not journalism.
Who needs “The Onion” when you have the comments section of the Cape Charles Mirror?
Editor’s Note 🙂
Wow, zounds and holy cow all wrapped into one here, Mr. Anthony (Tony) Sacco @ May 6, 2018 at 10:06 pm.
Where on earth did you ever come up with the crazy idea that of all people in here, Wayne Creed is a Democrat who favors the Democrats.
That’s positively preposterous, Mr. Anthony (Tony) Sacco, because if he really was, he wouldn’t let you in here in the first place to talk to him like that, because Democrats have thin skin and are very insecure, as was the case with Lyndon Baines Johnson, who acted the lout and bully with people, partly because he was simply ignorant, but also to cover up his insecurities, which stemmed from the fact that he knew he was ignorant, especially around the Kennedy people, who he was in awe of.
I personally think Wayne Creed is quite egalitarian, Mr. Anthony (Tony) Sacco; you know, someone who truly believes in the principle that all people are equal and deserve equal rights and opportunities, such as having their say on issues of importance in here regardless of what side of an issue someone might be on.
And what is this with your assertion that the hot water in the Pacific is coming through the Panama Canal an entering and warming the Atlantis Ocean?
What hot water are you talking about?
And the more important question is what is making it hot in the first place?
It can’t be hot without some external source of heat, since water does not naturally heat its own self up, but wouldn’t it be nice if it did?
Just think how much people could save on their heating bills if only water would heat itself up.
Which takes us back to your statement “and that Mr. Creed is where the hot temperature is coming from.”
Where is the hot temperature coming from?
You can’t have heat without producing heat, so what is producing the heat energy that has caused these hot temperatures?
PersonalIy, I think Wayne Creed does good research, but more importantly, he has the courage editorial integrity to put his research out there for public scrutiny, so if his research is incorrect, those who know the difference can demonstrate how that might be.
And who told you that when writing an article, the first thing of a journalist is to be non-bias?
I think the truth is, based on history, that the opposite is more accurate, as we can from a 1934 book entitled “Modern News Reporting” by Carl Warren, the Broadcast Editor of the New York Daily News at that time and a former Washington correspondent for the Chicago Tribune who was also an instructor in the Medill School of Journalism at Northwestern University, had a chapter, Chapter XXII, at pp.268-270, entitled “Slanting The Policy Story,” where “slanting” means to distort information by rendering it unfaithfully or incompletely, especially in order to reflect a particular viewpoint, as follows:
THE QUESTION OF ETHICS
Perhaps the most mooted question in the field of journalistic practice today – an issue often debated, never settled – is this one of policy in the news.
Some argue that an impassive, strictly neutral recording of the news is the paper’s chief obligation to the public, a function betrayed by any reporter who colors or trims the facts.
Policy writing is regarded by this group as something reprehensible, deceptive and insidious.
Taking an opposite point of view, others contend that the public demands of the newspaper intelligent interpretation as well as trustworthy assembling of facts.
They hold that mere parrot-like transmission of the day’s events to busy, apathetic readers makes the newspaper a negative spectator rather than a vigorous leader in community life.
*******
So far as the reporter is concerned, these problems of policy need not bother him greatly.
He has little voice in the matter for, like any other employee, he is a salaried craftsman, receiving orders and not giving them.
Seldom, if ever, will he be asked to forfeit his self-respect.
If his paper is strong on policies he should try to conform to them, regardless of his own personal views.
He writes what his superiors instruct him to write, in the way they want it written.
If he is unwilling to do so, his only alternative is to look for another job.
end quotes
I submit, Mr. Anthony (Tony) Sacco, that everyone in here, including you, has been doing just that, giving their opinion on most of their electronic writing in here, so why not Wayne Creed?
Should he be denied a point of view because he publishes the Cape Charles Mirror?
What kind of democracy is that?
And as to carrying a view to embarrassing the U.S. President, Donald Trump the Miraculous, Magnificent MAGA-man is doing all of that work by himself which this ridiculous, poorly-scripted daytime soap opera that poses as the Trump presidency, featuring porn star Stormy Daniels as the president’s main love interest.
You don’t think that is embarassing, Mr. Anthony (Tony) Sacco?