David Suzuki: We Totally Need To Eliminate Fossil Fuels And Go Carbon Zero

Hey, remember how members of the Cult of Climastrology told us they aren’t trying to eliminate all use of fossil fuels? Yeah, about that, hyper-Warmist David Suzuki tells the truth

Zero Carbon Emissions: The New Language Of Climate Change

If nothing else, the G7 countries’ recent agreement to end fossil fuel use for energy by 2100 signals a shift in the way we talk and think about global warming. Previous agreements were about reducing carbon emissions from burning coal, oil and gas. This takes matters a step further by envisioning a fossil fuel–free future.

There are reasons for cynicism: the long time frame means none of the politicians involved in the commitment will even be alive, let alone held accountable, for meeting the target in 2100; Canada and Japan watered down Germany’s proposal to end fossil fuel energy by 2050; and many governments, including Canada’s, haven’t met even their current weak commitments. But in calling for deep emissions cuts by 2050 and an end to fossil fuel energy by 2100 — “decarbonization” — the non-binding pledge at least shows governments recognize the need to confront climate change. (snip to the end)

Moving toward zero carbon emissions — in a much shorter timeline than agreed upon by Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom and the United States — is absolutely necessary, and not just for the climate. Eliminating fossil fuel energy will cut dangerous pollution, create new economic opportunities and ensure resources are available for wiser applications.

The words of scientists, government leaders and other experts — and now Pope Francis and the Dalai Lama — make it clear that it’s time to turn the page on this destructive and relatively recent chapter in our history. Now we must ensure our leaders strengthen and act on their commitments.

I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, if Warmists are so concerned about fossil fuels, why do they use them themselves? If we’re all doomed, why do they continue to use vast amounts of fossil fuels themselves?

Of course, Suzuki mentions the need for a carbon tax and a cap and trade scheme, which, surprise, puts lots of money into the hands of the government, rather than in the private sector. That’s one of the real goals.

Save $10 on purchases of $49.99 & up on our Fruit Bouquets at 1800flowers.com. Promo Code: FRUIT49
If you liked my post, feel free to subscribe to my rss feeds.

Both comments and trackbacks are currently closed

6 Responses to “David Suzuki: We Totally Need To Eliminate Fossil Fuels And Go Carbon Zero”

  1. Phil Taylor says:

    David Suzuki has a cottage and a motor boat. He wanted to restrict growth in my area by protecting the “Yellow belt” an area of farm land that has not been used as farm land for years. Thereby preventing farmers from selling their land for housing for millions of dollars.

    The claim is that we should not be disturbing nature as it distrupts the eco system. Unless you are David Suzuki. Then it is ok to go tramping through the woods or farmland.
    The Canadian media treat him very kindly and only give him “friendly interviews.”
    A while ago David went to Australia as a guest of a TV show and met more educated interviewers who debated him on GMO’s and Global warming.
    He did not fair too well there. Though he has a degree in science, he is formost a television personality.
    You can see this debate or interview here. It is overall quite entertaining and make you wonder why their is not more interviews like this in North America.
    This was taped just before the IPCC admitted on September 27th 2013 that there has been no warming for 15 years. They are aware that a report is soon to be released and discuss that.

    I which we would see actual climatologists in a similar king of discussion…. but we do not.


  2. Liam Thomas says:

    The Church of Climatology has a one liner.

    The earth is warming…..c02 is increasing….therefore the reason we are warming is because of fossil fuels which cause co2.

    Repeated a billion times per day.

    Refute this one liner……A billion times a day…….and the lie they have told often enough that is now repeated by kindergarteners is no longer the truth…….just a theory.

    Remember the science is settled even though scientist of all shapes and persuasions continue to call into question the SETTLED part of their debate. A lie told often enough becomes the truth.

    Refute the science is settled a billion times a day and their truth is exposed for the lies they perpetrate daily.

  3. Phil Taylor says:

    “Refute the science is settled a billion times a day and their truth is exposed for the lies they perpetrate daily.”

    This is a very good comment. Sadly skeptics are losing the PR battle. Especially in Canada whereby soon I will be paying a tax on a non existant issue. What most Canadians do not realize is that when we enter into Cap and Trade, money syphoned from industry does not all go to the government, but to the Con-artists that set up the Cap and Trade exchange. making them rich from the naive, the uninformed, the indifferent, and the poor that will not benefit from these funds that would otherwise be used for their benefit.

  4. david7134 says:

    Think of this. We don’t really know how people could cope with elimination of fossil fuels or if it would really effect a thing. So, lets have an experiment, Jeff is all for science so he would have no problem with an experiment. What we do is have all the people that feel an association between climate and anything human in nature to totally do away with use of fossil fuels and products. No cars, no truck delivery, no planes, no computers (plastic is oil), that all the rest of the stuff. We then watch to see what happens to CO2 over the years and how these people manage. Then, if the results are acceptable, the rest of us can follow their example.

  5. Phil Taylor says:

    Very intersting comment. But I guess you already know that they do not want you to stop using Fossil Fuel, just pay them for using it.
    I already suggested to my warmer colleagues that they can pay a voluntary Carbon Tax if they prefer, but not one has opted to do that. They do not want to pay until we all do. They also think that even though they will pay a carbon tax, the money will come back to them through Government programs or higher salaries as all of them work in the public centre or do not work at all.

  6. Liam Thomas says:

    James Hansen called cap and trade retarded…..oh those werent his words but that was essentially what he was saying about it.

    Why? Because as Phil pointed out it just makes another set of rich people richer…in this case democratic/communist donors or frontmen for the communist party of the world.

    He wants to go even farther……make corporations pay hefty taxes on co2 production and then return the money to the people in the form of payroll tax cuts…..

    Brilliant….Social security is already broke and he wants to cut even more the payroll tax that pays for medicare and medicaide and social security. Genius.

    The only problem it only benefits those that work….those that dont get higher prices on goods, services and gasoline and insurance without seeing a penny of the money back in their pockets.

    It is brilliant though…what it does is punish corporations forcing them to raise prices…..then by raising prices it puts even more burden on the poor and working class who then get a refund in the way of payroll tax cut….which in theory offsets the cost of the tax to corporations.

    Basically IT PUNISHES CORPORATIONS and slows the productivity of capitalism and makes socialism more competitive……Its a brilliant plan…..

    At least in their minds….take from the capitalists and give to the socialists………IIIIIIII>>>>>>>>>>>LLLLIIIIKKKKEEEEEE IIIITTTTTTT!

Pirate's Cove