Vocal Voices

That is COP21 (Conference of the Parties) in Paris. Yes, it is the climate thing.

The conference is expected to attract close to 50,000 participants including 25,000 official delegates from government, intergovernmental organisations, UN agencies, NGOs and civil society.

That is a lot of people to get to agree on something and I am less than optimistic. Even if they can agree on the measures already published they are still not enough.

Every meeting starts the same way. No progress is ever made to begin the next meeting from a step higher.

Namely they have not yet agreed that they need to agree on anything. Half the entire "show" will be nations agreeing that they need to agree. It is the same dance every time. They argue about Semantics until the last few moments. Then they try to thrash out the smallest and lest restricting changes they can, admitting nothing and leaving the next conference with the same starting point.

To be honest the very best outcome of this conference would be a unanimous statement that there is a problem and we must resolve it and that every future conference will work towards solving the problem, building on the work of the previous one.

That would drive this whole activity 1000 miles further than it goes today. It would allow governments to act independently as well as in concert and for binding legislation to be created to drive those governments actions and to make sure that no other country in the world takes advantage.

Most notably this is never the conclusion of any of the conferences. Therefore the wheels always turn full circle and we are always back where we started at each checkpoint. No progress is ever made and the only thing they can agree on is a treaty with no teeth which can be avoided or worked around by those who worship money and don’t care if 1/3 of the world will pay for it with their lives…

The very worst thing is that if you were to lay it out to those political activists just exactly who that 1/3 of the world represents, I don’t believe that it would make any change to their decision. The very poorest parts of Africa will be the least impacted. They have nothing and there is nothing anyone wants on their land. They live the closest to the Stone age and one step back from where they are currently living is not as large as the several steps back some more advanced countries will have to take.

As you say. More hot air. Just exactly what we need…. NOT!

The very poorest parts of [the world] will be the least impacted. They have nothing and there is nothing anyone wants on their land. They live the closest to the Stone age and one step back from where they are currently living is not as large as the several steps back some more advanced countries will have to take.

That should be tattooed in reverse on the foreheads of politicians and their business friends so that every time they look in a mirror.........

What is that phrase from some good book: The meek will inherit the Earth? Not that they will want what is left of it.

and the carbon footprint from all these "experts" travelling has not affected the climate in any way i presume?

victor wrote:and the carbon footprint from all these "experts" travelling has not affected the climate in any way i presume?

Not unless they chartered jets to get there. Or drove.

Probably more climate impact has been caused by the EU delegates driving there than those who flew on scheduled airline flights. Food for thought....

If they agree on something it will be worth the cost. If they don't it won't matter a tiny little bit in the grand scheme of things....

Workingman wrote:What is that phrase from some good book: The meek will inherit the Earth? Not that they will want what is left of it.

And the rich will inherit... Elysium.... It is no surprise that the space industry is going into overdrive right now. 50 years and they will just about be in the place they need to be... Right on time to get out of the earth falling over the climate cliff....

Next big steps? Automated surveys of the asteroid belt. Research into bringing metal, water and carbon bearing asteroids to geosynchronous Earth orbit for mining and processing. No limit to energy, no issues with polluting gasses and chemicals. Zero G is also perfect for creating ball bearings, just spit out a chunk of molten steel and it will from a perfect sphere.

All whilst mouthing platitudes and trying to block the carbon emissions which are paying for it.....

Your tax money working for you, every day of the year.... Well if you have a chance of getting off the planet that is...

It is rather interesting (frightening?) that many of the things the film expanded on are well past the embryonic stage: Chinese Moon base; Mars base; International Space Station; Rosetta mission; various other missions to the asteroid and Kuyper belts as well as to moons of other planets.

Who knows the real reasons for their existence?

Workingman wrote:Who knows the real reasons for their existence?

My guess would be options and challenges. The more you know, the more you can calculate how hard it will be. They're getting better at it. I doubt we'll see many more failed attempts at Mars landings. Also, when the Moon restarts, there is guaranteed to be a race to get to it and claim territory.

It would probably be a lot easier to set up a manufacturing base on the moon with asteroids orbiting the moon. In fact a moon based sky hook is quite viable and allows land based manufacturing in low G with 0 cost exit from the Moons gravity well.

We'll know in about a decade what they intend to do. However there is one challenge left and as far as I can see only the ion engines have a chance to solve it right now. Namely the time and cost of getting to the asteroid belt and getting asteroids back to the Earth Moon orbit.

There has been an awful lot written about this, but our excursions around the solar system are one invention short of reality. What we need is a reactionless engine or an engine who's reaction mass to thrust ratio is so high that you can hold enough fuel for years of thrust.

None of which is compatible with solving the climate issue on the earth. But very compatible with getting a few very rich, very privileged, off the planet and living just below the van allen belts until there is time for the impact of the atmospheric CO2 to have worked itself to a standstill and for the requisite level of population to have died off.

I am so, so tired of this BS about the "Earth being in danger". The Earth is in no danger at all. The Earth will survive quite happily thank you it has seen more heat, more CO2, less ice, and much higher sea levels.

Humans have not!

I was reading in New Scientist some time back how today's technology makes it possible to nudge asteroids into geosynchronous orbits. OK, not any old asteroid, but certainly ones with resources we might use.

Ion engines and thrusters already exist, They are useless at getting payloads into orbit, but get them into space, or on a low gravity launch platform, and they come into their own.

Scenario. Identify an asteroid. Send a recovery vehicle propelled by an ion engine to said asteroid. Attach a few ion thrusters and bring the recovery vehicle and asteroid 'home'.

We are not far off making that a possibility.

Agree about the Earth. It is the species living on it, us, that are in danger.