The tone deafness and hypocrisy is amazing
The first gathering of a new international “coalition of the willing” to transition away from fossil fuels recently took place in Colombia. It’s a separate event from the UN COP climate negotiations and was born in part out of frustration over fossil fuel friendly nations like the US, Russia, China, and Saudi Arabia stalling the COP process. Rodrigo Estrada, Senior Climate Advisor at Greenpeace International, was there and joins Host Aynsley O’Neill to share the takeaways and next steps.
Transcript
DOERING: From PRX and the Jennifer and Ted Stanley Studios at the University of Massachusetts Boston, this is Living on Earth, I’m Jenni Doering.O’NEILL: And I’m Aynsley O’Neill.
The first gathering of a new international “coalition of the willing” to transition away from fossil fuels took place in Santa Marta, Colombia at the end of April. It’s a separate event from the UN COP climate negotiations and it was born in part out of frustration over fossil fuel-friendly nations stalling the COP process. So, for this conference, nations seen as spoilers, like the United States, Russia, China, India, and Saudi Arabia were specifically not invited. Jointly convened by Colombia and the Netherlands, this event brought together 57 countries and the European Union, representing roughly 30% of global energy demand. Also present were civil society organizations and representatives of indigenous peoples. The conference was aimed at accelerating political momentum for a just energy transition and closing the gap between discussions and concrete action when it comes to international climate negotiations. Rodrigo Estrada is a Senior Climate Advisor at Greenpeace International who was there in Santa Marta. Rodrigo, welcome to Living on Earth!
So, 57 nations and the EU sent people on long, fossil fueled trips to Santa Marta? How many came on private jets? How many traveled around town in fossil fueled vehicles? How many protesters took fossil fueled trips to protest?
See those clothes? Made with petroleum. That sign? Petroleum. Most of those flags? Petroleum? The glasses? Yup, petroleum? The hats? Mostly petroleum. All their phones? Yes, petroleum! You can preach at me when you’ve given up your own use of fossil fuels (50% of a barrel goes to things other than gas, diesel, and lubricating oils), nutters.
Based on current consumption rates and known reserves, non-renewable fossil fuels are estimated to last for another 50–100 years, with oil and natural gas projected to run out by roughly 2150. New discoveries, improved extraction technology, and a global shift to renewables can change these timelines. There is plenty of time for our grandkids and great-grandkids to figure it out.
Although some “experts” claim coal could run out by 2100, the U.S. has some 500 years of king coal – and we can even turn coal into gas! The downsides to burning coal have been overstated. Human civilization was built on the back of coal!!
Coal is a combustible, black or brownish-black sedimentary rock formed from ancient plant matter subjected to intense heat and pressure over millions of years. It is primarily composed of carbon, along with hydrogen, sulfur, oxygen, and nitrogen. God gave us coal for one reason – to burn it!!
But what about “global warming/climate changed (hoax/scam)” you whine? It’s a fake commie plot to take hard-earned dollars from hard working white men and redistribute to Africans and Pacific Islanders, with “scientists” taking their cut.
The wacko Teach typed: “You can preach at me when you’ve given up your own use of fossil fuels (50% of a barrel goes to things other than gas, diesel, and lubricating oils), nutters.”
LOL. Teach won’t listen, regardless of what you do? What sensible human would base their behavior on what others think?
BTW, nutter Teach is either misinformed or lying, “(50% of a barrel goes to things other than gas, diesel, and lubricating oils)”. That is untrue. According to the U.S. gubmint (https://www.eia.gov/todayinenergy/detail.php?id=35672) only about 10% of fossil fuels are used for non-energy generating products. But who can trust the U.S. gubmint, amIright?
But even if wacko Teach’s gross exaggerations were true, cutting CO2 emissions in half would greatly reduce global warming (scam)!
Allegedly, you mean